Official Na'vi Dictionary

Started by Tirea Aean, May 23, 2011, 11:59:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Tanri

Quote from: Plumps on July 18, 2011, 02:40:51 AM
Quote from: Blue Elf on July 18, 2011, 01:13:20 AM
Phrase "nga yawne lu oer" is already in dictionary. IMHO no other action is needed. Maybe add this phrase directly to yawne definition too?
Agreed. If people would take the time to look through all the entries they would find it in apendix F.
I always found it strange ... this notion of wanting to know what 'I love you' means in a language that one does not speak otherwise. Nobody asks for the sentence: 'I'm sorry, I think yours is a fascinating language but unfortunately I can't speak it.' :P

Mllte oe nìwotx.
To add "nga yawne lu oer" into the description of yawne is the maximum we can do for those, who don't tried (or even wanted) to read any other resources than vocabulary, because this example surely exists in all available texts about Na'vi.
Tätxawyu akì'ong.

Tirea Aean

yeah, but people go after tìyawn more than yawne. though I think it could be a good idea.

Puvomun

Quote from: Tirea Aean on July 18, 2011, 07:14:15 AM
yeah, but people go after tìyawn more than yawne. though I think it could be a good idea.

Mllte. Adding this to the dictionary in the proper place gives 'us' at least the option to say "you're doing it wrong, check the dictionary". If we care to bother enough.
Krr a lì'fya lam sraw, may' frivìp utralit.

Ngopyu ayvurä.

Toruk Makto

#203
Lu is in several derivatives, but doesn't form constructs like si, so probably shouldn't be in the dict as a word. I agree with Blue Elf that the phrase already in there should be sufficient to determine this use.

Markì


EDIT: Unless we want to float a suggestion in the LEP for yawnelu as a formal derivative?

Lì'fyari leNa'vi 'Rrtamì, vay set 'almong a fra'u zera'u ta ngrrpongu
Na'vi Dictionary: http://files.learnnavi.org/dicts/NaviDictionary.pdf

Plumps

Quote from: Markì on July 18, 2011, 11:13:43 AM
EDIT: Unless we want to float a suggestion in the LEP for yawnelu as a formal derivative?

Oh, please no :(

This could restrict the use of the combination lu + yawne to always yawne(-)lu which goes against relatively free word order.

Puvomun

Quote from: Plumps on July 18, 2011, 11:22:12 AM
Quote from: Markì on July 18, 2011, 11:13:43 AM
EDIT: Unless we want to float a suggestion in the LEP for yawnelu as a formal derivative?

Oh, please no :(


I agree with this. Rather leave it as it is than such a measure.
Krr a lì'fya lam sraw, may' frivìp utralit.

Ngopyu ayvurä.

Toruk Makto


Lì'fyari leNa'vi 'Rrtamì, vay set 'almong a fra'u zera'u ta ngrrpongu
Na'vi Dictionary: http://files.learnnavi.org/dicts/NaviDictionary.pdf

Blue Elf

Pawm is transitive, but if used with san..sìk works as intransitive
(http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Canon/2010/UltxaAyharyu%C3%A4#Transitivity_with_Speaking_Verbs)

So, it is good idea to mark it as vtr in the dictionary? (now unmarked)
Oe lu skxawng skxakep. Slä oe nerume mi.
"Oe tasyätxaw ulte koren za'u oehu" (Limonádový Joe)


Tirea Aean

Quote from: Blue Elf on July 18, 2011, 03:18:42 PM
Pawm is transitive, but if used with san..sìk works as intransitive
(http://wiki.learnnavi.org/index.php/Canon/2010/UltxaAyharyu%C3%A4#Transitivity_with_Speaking_Verbs)

So, it is good idea to mark it as vtr in the dictionary? (now unmarked)

as mentioned, it depends. it feel like the speaking verbs are mostly used with san sìk intransitively, but if all the other ones are marked vtr, then why not. (last I checked, peng and plltxe are vtr)

EDIT:

plltxe is just v.

Tirea Aean

It seems the authority of the dictionary is being questioned on the matter of naming the elements of the tripartite(or at least the names of the case suffixes)...

Can we agree that the old terms (subjective/absolutive,ergative,accusative) have indeed been REPLACED BY new terms (subjective,agentive,patientive) ?

I hear claim that there is no difference in accusative and patientive and therefore still sticking to accusative is okay.

What are the thoughts of the congregation? I just want UNITY, and correctness.

Ekirä

Neither sulìn nor kan'ìn have stress markers.

//off current topic random dictionary note

Tirea Aean

#211
Quote from: Ekirä on July 18, 2011, 04:56:21 PM
Neither sulìn nor kan'ìn have stress markers.

//off current topic random dictionary note

please dont feel bad for posting this, as it is actually right on target with the original post. Markì's got it ;)

SO. no thoughts on accusative vs. patientive? I wish I were more of a trained linguist.

wm.annis

Quote from: Tirea Aean on July 18, 2011, 04:50:54 PM
Can we agree that the old terms (subjective/absolutive,ergative,accusative) have indeed been REPLACED BY new terms (subjective,agentive,patientive) ?

It seems best to stick to the terms Frommer uses.

Tirea Aean

how about not official dictionary material but in the process of discussing and teaching outside the dictionary? (sorry about marginally going offtopic)

wm.annis

Quote from: Tirea Aean on July 18, 2011, 06:21:08 PM
how about not official dictionary material but in the process of discussing and teaching outside the dictionary? (sorry about marginally going offtopic)

There's no overwhelming reason to deviate from Frommer's terminology.

Tirea Aean

Quote from: wm.annis on July 18, 2011, 06:33:03 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on July 18, 2011, 06:21:08 PM
how about not official dictionary material but in the process of discussing and teaching outside the dictionary? (sorry about marginally going offtopic)

There's no overwhelming reason to deviate from Frommer's terminology.

...which is what MY opinion is.


Tanri

About ergative/accusative vs. agentive/patientive, it is not an easy question.
Let me to explain this problem from my "amateur linguist" point of view:

The reason for this confusion is the fact, that Na'vi is not purely ergative language, nor purely nominative language.

1/ Ergative-absolutive languages use the same grammatical form for both intransitive subject and transitive object.
In this type of language, the remarkable and special form is the transitive subject, called ergative.
In Na'vi they are all different - intransitive subject remains as is (in nominative), while transitive object gets -ti ending.

2/ Nominative-accusative languages (as all European i know, including english) share the same form for both transitive and intransitive subjects.
In this type of language, the specialized form is the transitive object, called accusative.
In Na'vi, we have -ìl for transitive subject, while intransitive subject remains as is (in nominative).

So, both types of languages use actually two grammatical forms - common form and specialised form.
But in Na'vi we have three specialised forms, and they are called in the same way as in theirs native language types.
This is the reason, why we have Ergative, Accusative, and Nominative in one language - because this language is a combination of both types 1/ and 2/.

However, please keep in mind that these terms are exactly what they are - only names for some grammatical forms (cases), and as all names and terms, they can be changed by authority in language (obviously, Karyu Pawl).
Tätxawyu akì'ong.

Plumps

If we go after Karyu Pawl's terminology then we have his saying as early as Dec 19, 2009 in his guest post on the Language Log. There he calls the 6 cases:
Quote from: K. Pawl, 19 Dec, 2009Subjective, Agentive, Patientive, Genitive, Dative, Topical.

So, there you have it. I think that should put an end to this discussion. :)

Toruk Makto

Quote from: Ekirä on July 18, 2011, 04:56:21 PM
Neither sulìn nor kan'ìn have stress markers.

//off current topic random dictionary note

Corrected. Next dictionary update will be Friday.

Lì'fyari leNa'vi 'Rrtamì, vay set 'almong a fra'u zera'u ta ngrrpongu
Na'vi Dictionary: http://files.learnnavi.org/dicts/NaviDictionary.pdf

Toruk Makto

Quote from: wm.annis on July 18, 2011, 06:18:37 PM
Quote from: Tirea Aean on July 18, 2011, 04:50:54 PM
Can we agree that the old terms (subjective/absolutive,ergative,accusative) have indeed been REPLACED BY new terms (subjective,agentive,patientive) ?

It seems best to stick to the terms Frommer uses.

I agree. In the world of Na'vi, Dr. Frommer is the absolute authority. We should definitely use what he uses in "official" documentation.

Lì'fyari leNa'vi 'Rrtamì, vay set 'almong a fra'u zera'u ta ngrrpongu
Na'vi Dictionary: http://files.learnnavi.org/dicts/NaviDictionary.pdf