Vreleksá Forum Index Vreleksá
The Alurhsa Word for Constructed: Creativity in both scripts and languages
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

TC: Tower of Babel
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Translations
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
StrangeMagic
Admin


Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 637

PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 9:44 pm    Post subject: TC: Tower of Babel Reply with quote

(English Standard Version - 2002)

1. Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.
2. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.
3. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.
4. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth."
5. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.
6. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.
7. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech."
8. So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.
9. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth.

(Newest Revised Version of Eleypherion)

1. Laéia, mukula nularmas bocantéqua nilg oun towekga qualis candiz.
2. Oun dai mingu qanzé saramga mo’ochiwiz, duga Shinarmukanonaré napilaz oun tri guchilaz.
3. Oun inivéou tombokilaz, “Climéyé, bokosga hazérom naégeel gelutom, oun geegeel guzudpom supinku’uk.” Oun bokos as bok, oun té’es as cofka candilaz.
4. Pré tombokilaz, “Climéye cookid oun chachunga o zhémart stram aéniugona pararakerom naégaé naégeel gelutom, oun siqué as naégaé hazerom naégeel gelutom, cast manico-desi-mukula-nularmasfan sanfar shom.”
5. Oun Hopluni cookid oun chachunga cliwiz do’op balupir, durod nasaga desi namsar pararakeriyoyol.
6. Oun Hopluni tombokiz, “Balubiméyé, nilg saramga shilaz, oun bo nilg bocantéqua candilaz, oun ku stegun desi i lengéyo shiz paset. Oun pundugeli salahéyo lengar as geegeel su’chocho shéil.
7. Climéyé, cliwi do’op naégeel gelutom oun tri geemart bocantéqua dizolm, vala nivémart lankau su’buécajundo.
8. Vala Hopluni dai tri manico-desi-mukula-nularmasfan geegeel sanfiz, oun cookid pararakilbat aranilaz.
9. Ilnaka zhémart siqué Babel juriol, fica Hopluni tri bocantéqua desi mukula nularmas diziz. Oun dai tri Hopluni manico-desi-mukula-nularmasfan geegeel sanfiz.

(Older Version of Eleypherion)
1. Laeia il hularmas mukula candiz nilg bocantequa oun il qualis towekga.
2. Oun qwanze saramga moochiilaz dai il mingu, napilaz bu duga dalee il muka desi Shinar oun guchilaz triblock.
3. Oun tombokilaz pon nilg wajozaj, "Climeye, glutmea naegeel hazeom bokosga, oun guzudpom geegeel spinkuuk." Oun candilaz bokos chais bok, oun tees chais cofka.
4. Preced tombokilaz, "Climeye, glutmea naegeel pararkeom naegae bu cookid oun bu chachunga zik zheart stram dalee il aeniugga, oun glutmea naegeel hazeom bu sique chais naegae, cast naega sanfareb lara il manico desi il nularmas mukula."
5. Oun il Hopluni climiz doop blupir il cookid oun il chachunga, durod il nasaga desi lamsarga candil pararkeiyoyol.
6. Oun il Hopluni tombokiz, "Blubgimeye, shil nilg saramga, oun candil bo nilg bocanequa, oun ku shi paset il stegun desi which exil lengar. Oun pundugli ne salahil lengar kun laeia ungchungeb chais geegeel.
7. Climeye, glutmea naegeel exom doop oun triblock umbuyuom geegaart bocantequa, vala ne geega telonik su'buecom nilg wajozajart lankau."
8. Vala il Hopluni sanfiz geegeel dai triblock lara il manico desi il mukula, oun aranilaz charan pararkeilbat il cookid.
9. Itnaka zheart sique juriz Babel, ficatio triblock il Hopluni umbuyuiz il bocantequa desi bo il mukula. Oun dai triblock il Hopluni sanfiz geegeel lara il manico desi bo il mukula.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Raitolísteoste


1. Reini øtǿmenw athi øme à iitistø wzw.
2. À lǿnw ysw iǿgeogw riani, ǿnw me siihu Sjináraomi à musazu reimi reini.
3. À ǿnw ue stu ǿomy, 'Ysuỳ, u imezakø ezuỳ, à ø otiothazu øty.' À ǿnw imezake wzu ókeotii à mitumenare imezékeotii.
4. Ǿnw ue stu reini, 'Ysuỳ, u øladame à ui ygime ezuỳ u eoio uéri øtygame ygámøomi; à u laste ezuỳ u eoio, ieo úne øtamasazuy øtǿmeri iihámeomy."
5. À Ólonw ugysw øladame à ui ygime íhwreoio lǿri iílønw ue ezu.
6. À Ólonw ue stw, 'Ihuỳ, ø athale, à ø athi øste wzu, à reize iinaze athati uéori ǿni ue zu. À ui rúzeni uizi ǿoio vöǿ ue zu.
7. Ysuỳ, u ugasuỳ à ǿri øste uøviazuỳ riavi, ua zïǿ ǿri ste øvu reivi.'
8. Reivi, Ólonw ø øtamasazw øtǿmeri iihámeomy, à ǿnw ue iinuzu ø øladame ezu.
9. Reivi, Mameláranw lastui éogi, va Ólonw ǿmeri øste uøviazw. À Ólonw ø øtamasazw réimeogw øtǿmeri iihámeomy.

*pant*


Last edited by Tolkien_Freak on Sun May 11, 2008 3:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 6:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow!
and
Thanks!
and
Morphemic glosses, please?
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
langover94



Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 509
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow! Well, I think that I'll have to work on this some other time, because my conlang has been under a slight reform. I'll try and post it later though.
_________________
Join us at: The Renewed Spirits Forum!
Please join for good discussion. (We need members!)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
StrangeMagic
Admin


Joined: 18 Apr 2007
Posts: 637

PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1. Now, Earth whole language one and words same had.
2. And from east as people migrated, plain Shinar-land-in they found and there settled.
3. And to-one-another they said, “Come, bricks make us let, and them burn thoroughly.” And brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar they had.
4. Then they said, “Come city and tower with its top heaven-in build ourselves us let, and name for ourselves make us let, lest face-of-Earth-whole-over dispersed we be.”
5. And Lord city and tower came down to see, which children of man had built.
6. And Lord said, “Behold, one people they are, and all one language they have, and this beginning of what they will do is only. And nothing that they propose to do will for them impossible be.”
7. Come, go down us let and there their language confuse, so that one another’s speech they may not understand.
8. So Lord from there face-of-all-Earth-over them dispersed, and city building they left off.
9. Therefore its name Babel was called, because Lord there language of Earth all confused. And from there Lord face-of-all-Earth-over them dispersed.

(I haven't included the changes in verbs... Too lazy at the moment. >_<)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I like glossing this way a little better, even though it's less readable.

1. Now whole.earth-PAST one language and same.word-PL has
2. And people-PL-PAST come east-ELL SUBR-time, they-PAST place find Shinar-INE and settle DEM-place DEM-time.
3. And they-PAST REL say they-CONTESSIVE, 'come-IMP-PL, we bricks make-IMP-PL, and them heat fully. And they-PAST brick have rock-COMP and bitumen mortar-COMP.
4. They-PAST REL say DEM-time, 'come, we city and REL tower make-IMP-PL us BEN REL-POSS highest.point heaven-INE; and we name make-IMP-PL us BEN, or.else we-AORIST disperse-PASS whole.earth-POSS face-CONTESSIVE.'
5. And Lord-past come.down city and REL tower see-INF-BEN man-PL-POSS child-PL-PAST REL make.
6. And Lord-past REL say, 'see-IMP-PL, they one.people, and they one language have, and DEM-action beginning only REL-GEN they-FUT REL do. And REL NEG-action-FUT impossible them-BEN VOL-they REL do.
7. Come-IMP-PL, we come.down-IMP-PL and they-POSS language make.unintelligible-IMP-PL SUBR-reason, NEG POT-they they-POSS speech understand DEM-reason.
8. DEM-reason, Lord-PAST they disperse whole.earth-POSS face-CONTESSIVE, and they-PAST REL stop they city build.
9. DEM-reason, Babel-PAST name-PASS it-DAT, because Lord-PAST world.POSS language make.unintelligible. And Lord-PAST they disperse DEM-place-ELL whole.earth-POSS face-CONTESSIVE.

*Raitoliste uses a sort of first-person imperative for jussive statements, with the stated subject of what looks like a second-person imperative is the first-person pronoun.

And now I have to fix a couple of things in the original translation.


Last edited by Tolkien_Freak on Mon May 12, 2008 9:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
east-ELL
What's "-ELL"? Do you mean "elative" (out of the East)?

Quote:
SUBR-time
What's "SUBR-"?

Quote:
they-PAST
Tense on a pronoun?

Quote:
they-PAST REL say
Where's the "REL" go? Is it a separate, independent word in Raitolísteoste?

Quote:
they-CONTESSIVE
What's "CONTESSIVE" again?

Quote:
they-PAST brick have rock-COMP and bitumen mortar-COMP.
What's "-COMP"? These would seem to be Essive or Translative. But they're "-COMP" instead.

Quote:
us BEN REL-POSS highest.point
Is "BEN" an independent word? And what does "REL-POSS" look like?


Quote:
we-AORIST
How does a pronoun be "-AORIST"?

Quote:
see-INF-BEN
Here "-BEN" looks like an incorporated morpheme of some kind, rather than a separate word. Does "see-INF-BEN" translate as "for to see"? (i.e. "in order to see"?)

Quote:
REL-GEN
What's that look like?

Quote:
SUBR-reason
Quote:
NEG
Quote:
POT-they
Explaion those three things.

Quote:
Babel-PAST
Tense on a proper noun?

Quote:
name-PASS
The passive voice of the verb "to name", right?

Quote:
it-DAT
Why dative here?

Quote:
Lord-PAST
?

Quote:
*Raitoliste uses a sort of first-person imperative for jussive statements, with the stated subject of what looks like a second-person imperative is the first-person pronoun.
I did not see the asterisk this comment was intended to refer to. What were you talking about?

---------

Thanks.

If you hadn't explained so much already I wouldn't have known enough to ask these questions.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Aeetlrcreejl



Joined: 08 Jun 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Over yonder

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:35 am    Post subject: Re: TC: Tower of Babel Reply with quote

StrangeMagic wrote:
(English Standard Version - 2002)

1. Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.
2. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.
3. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.
4. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth."
5. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.
6. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.
7. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech."
8. So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.
9. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth.


1. Tas jiletja cata qi som xamtæ zéreet.
2. Qi yaqjæ paveret tipatarrǿ, xolna Šinartarra narevet qi iqathareket.
3. Qi dereót, "Pjuveevv, iƫnæ pjufzéemm, qi morkə ettpjuahemm." Qi pathŋa ettja iƫƫa zéreet, qi mijarŋa ettja muzzarta zéreet.
4. Tam dereet, "Pjuveevv, ommwa etrela qi xlifla upša curtarra pjufzéemm, qi ommwa tukna pjufzéemm, limnasaraoemm jilettarruo.
5. Qi Hašta vereet fuhawa etrena qi xlifna ka łimpana Hašja fzéreet.
6. Qi Hašna dereet, "Nas, somett, qi cata et ettja, qi et naj sathurta holejetxja. Qi ovta simtaxra bivet.
7. Pjuveevv, pjuveemm qi ho pjusaeremm calaivv na bovbūĵoót."
8. Na Hašna ettsareraoet hy jilettarruo, qi pirekoet fzéto etrela.
9. Hy tukta Babel, bu ho Hašna saereret cala jiletja. Qi hy ettsareraoet jilettarruo.
_________________
Iwocwá ĵọṭãsák.
/iwotSwa_H d`Z`Ot`~asa_Hk/
[iocwa_H d`Z`Ot`_h~a_Hk]


Last edited by Aeetlrcreejl on Sat May 17, 2008 10:33 pm; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
Tolkien_Freak wrote:
east-ELL
What's "-ELL"? Do you mean "elative" (out of the East)?

Yep, elative. (Is it elative or ellative?)

Quote:
Quote:
SUBR-time
What's "SUBR-"?

Subordinating. Pronouns in Raitoliste are somewhat complicated and really hard to render with normal glossing rules.

Quote:
Quote:
they-PAST
Tense on a pronoun?

In Raitoliste, tense is marked on nouns. It's almost fully nominal TAM.

Quote:
Quote:
they-PAST REL say
Where's the "REL" go? Is it a separate, independent word in Raitoliste?

It's a relative pronoun, so I'm not quite sure what you're asking.

Quote:
Quote:
they-CONTESSIVE
What's "CONTESSIVE" again?

I don't know if I named the case well. It's supposed to be used to mean 'within' for plural nouns and 'across' for singular.

Quote:
Quote:
they-PAST brick have rock-COMP and bitumen mortar-COMP.
What's "-COMP"? These would seem to be Essive or Translative. But they're "-COMP" instead.

I probably should mark that as essive, thanks.

Quote:
Quote:
us BEN REL-POSS highest.point
Is "BEN" an independent word? And what does "REL-POSS" look like?

Those kinds of cases are independent words after most personal pronouns.
Not sure what you mean by 'look like'.

Quote:
Quote:
we-AORIST
How does a pronoun be "-AORIST"?

Like I said, tense is marked on nouns.

Quote:
Quote:
see-INF-BEN
Here "-BEN" looks like an incorporated morpheme of some kind, rather than a separate word. Does "see-INF-BEN" translate as "for to see"? (i.e. "in order to see"?)

For stating purpose, Raitoliste uses an infinitive in the benefactive. It does in fact translate as 'for to see', though you probably would reword it.

Quote:
Quote:
REL-GEN
What's that look like?

Not sure what you're asking.

Quote:
Quote:
SUBR-reason
Quote:
NEG
Quote:
POT-they
Explaion those three things.

Subordinating reason pronoun (sort of works as saying 'the next statement is the intent of the action in this statement'), negative mood (not), they with a potential-mood marker (they can).

Quote:
Quote:
Babel-PAST
Tense on a proper noun?

See above.

Quote:
Quote:
name-PASS
The passive voice of the verb "to name", right?

Yeah.

Quote:
Quote:
it-DAT
Why dative here?

In Raitoliste, to name something is literally 'to name [the name] to it'.


Quote:
Quote:
*Raitoliste uses a sort of first-person imperative for jussive statements, with the stated subject of what looks like a second-person imperative is the first-person pronoun.
I did not see the asterisk this comment was intended to refer to. What were you talking about?

It happens a couple of times (ex: u imezakø ezuỳ, we bricks make-IMP-PL). The asterisk is just sort of there.

---------

Quote:
Thanks.

Thank you, you've helped me improve both my lang and my glossing skills.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Aeetlrcreejl
@T_F
Thanks. More and better comments later.

-----------------------------------------------------------

@T_F you answered most of my questions. Thanks.
Here's me trying to re-ask the ones you said you didn't understand:
Which Raitoliste word was "BEN"?
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-BEN" in "see-INF-BEN"? (And which was "see-" and whic was "-INF-"?)
Which Raitoliste word was "REL"?
Which Raitoliste word was "REL-POSS"?
Which Raitoliste word was "REL-GEN"?
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-POSS"?
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-GEN"?
How does "-GEN" differ from "-POSS"?

--------------------------------------------

@T_F: Yes, it's "elative" with one < l >. I'm not sure how it's supposed to be abbreviated.

And I don't know what, if anything, should be done to improve the terminology for "-CONTESSIVE" and for "-COMP". Maybe a better choice could be made, but the important thing is to explain what these cases are used for. (as you've done. Maybe you'd like to do it a bit earlier or more prominently or something? Or maybe not. But not explaining at all is what too many of us would do, and you did explain, so you're ahead of us.)
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2008 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
@T_F you answered most of my questions. Thanks.

No problem. I like answering questions about my lang, since I almost never get asked.


Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "BEN"?

eoio, I believe. It's the case ending with no word, since originally most cases counted as postpositions after all words, and still do with some pronouns.
Quote:
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-BEN" in "see-INF-BEN"? (And which was "see-" and whic was "-INF-"?)

íhw(see)-re(INF)-[e]oio(BEN). The e in eoio drops out, since it's already there with -re.
Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "REL"?

Either ui or ue, I'm not sure where you're talking about. Ui is used as an adjective (for example, in 'the man that went' it would modify 'man') and ue is used as a noun (in 'the man that went' it would be the subject of the clause with 'went').
Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "REL-POSS"?

Uéri. Essentially, it means 'whose'.
Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "REL-GEN"?

Uéori. It means more of 'of which' or 'of whom'.
Quote:
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-POSS"?

-ri.
Quote:
Which Raitoliste morpheme was "-GEN"?

-[e]ori.
Quote:
How does "-GEN" differ from "-POSS"?

I'm not sure if I can explain it very well.
Possessive is used more to say that something belongs to the possessive noun, or that something is a quality of the possessive noun. Genitive is used more for modifying other nouns (the example here is 'the beginning of what they will do' - 'what' is genitive because it still modifies 'beginning', but it's not possessive because 'beginning' is not an object or quality that 'what they will do' possesses).

--------------------------------------------

Quote:
@T_F: Yes, it's "elative" with one <l>. I'm not sure how it's supposed to be abbreviated.

And I don't know what, if anything, should be done to improve the terminology for "-CONTESSIVE" and for "-COMP". Maybe a better choice could be made, but the important thing is to explain what these cases are used for. (as you've done. Maybe you'd like to do it a bit earlier or more prominently or something? Or maybe not. But not explaining at all is what too many of us would do, and you did explain, so you're ahead of us.)

Thanks. I'm still trying to figure out case names and glossing rules, so thanks very much for asking all these questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "REL"?

Either ui or ue, I'm not sure where you're talking about. Ui is used as an adjective (for example, in 'the man that went' it would modify 'man') and ue is used as a noun (in 'the man that went' it would be the subject of the clause with 'went').
I'm not sure I get the difference. A subordinator that introduces a relative clause (a clausal adjective) is called a relativizer, while one that introduces a complement clause (a clausal noun) is called a complementizer. But it looks like both of these are relativizers; "that went" modifies "man" in both cases, and so is a "clausal adjective", i.e., a relativizizer. Furthermore, "that", in the English, appears to be used as a pronoun taking the place of the relative clause's head noun. So it's both a relativizer and a relative pronoun. I can't see by your explanation what is the difference between ui and ue.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Quote:
How does "-GEN" differ from "-POSS"?
I'm not sure if I can explain it very well. Possessive is used more to say that something belongs to the possessive noun, or that something is a quality of the possessive noun. Genitive is used more for modifying other nouns (the example here is 'the beginning of what they will do' - 'what' is genitive because it still modifies 'beginning', but it's not possessive because 'beginning' is not an object or quality that 'what they will do' possesses).
That's probably about as good an explanation as occurs in real-life grammars with this distinction. I thought it might be something like that, but I wanted to read you saying so. It may take several examples for the reader to get comfortable with the difference, at least with the way Raitoliste does them differently; but your paragraph I just quoted is probably all the warning they'd need.

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
thanks very much for asking all these questions.
You're welcome! It's an interesting language.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aeetlrcreejl wrote:
1. Tas jiletja cata qi som xamtæ zéreet.
2. Qi yaqjæ paveret tipatarrǿ, xolna Šinartarra narevet qi iqathareket.
3. Qi dereót, "Pjuveeevv, iƫnæ pjufemm, qi morkə ettpjuahemm." Qi pathŋa ettja iƫƫa zéreet, qi mijarŋa ettja muzzarta zéreet.
4. Tam dereet, "Pjuveevv, ommwa etrena qi xlifna upša curtarra pjufzéemm, qi ommwa tukna pjufzéemm, limnasaraoemm jilettarruo.

I'll get the rest done later.
I'm looking forward to a morphemic gloss as well.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2008 9:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

eldin raigmore wrote:
Tolkien_Freak wrote:
Quote:
Which Raitoliste word was "REL"?

Either ui or ue, I'm not sure where you're talking about. Ui is used as an adjective (for example, in 'the man that went' it would modify 'man') and ue is used as a noun (in 'the man that went' it would be the subject of the clause with 'went').
I'm not sure I get the difference. A subordinator that introduces a relative clause (a clausal adjective) is called a relativizer, while one that introduces a complement clause (a clausal noun) is called a complementizer. But it looks like both of these are relativizers; "that went" modifies "man" in both cases, and so is a "clausal adjective", i.e., a relativizizer. Furthermore, "that", in the English, appears to be used as a pronoun taking the place of the relative clause's head noun. So it's both a relativizer and a relative pronoun. I can't see by your explanation what is the difference between ui and ue.


I think it's that ui is the relativizer (would it be more of a relative adjective?) and ue is the subject of the relative clause.

I should probably give a Raitoliste example:
Ui le eti uénw sw. (The man that went is good.)

The main clause is 'le eti' (the man is good), and the relative clause is 'uénw sw' ([that] went). Ui indicates that the relative clause is modifying the word 'le', while ue takes the place of the subject in the relative clause. It makes it easier with Raitoliste's very strict word order.

Ue in a main clause can also be a complementizer, but that doesn't have to do with this.

Quote:
You're welcome! It's an interesting language.

Thanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tolkien_Freak wrote:
I think it's that ui is the relativizer (would it be more of a relative adjective?) and ue is the subject of the relative clause.
I should probably give a Raitoliste example:
Ui le eti uénw sw. (The man that went is good.)
The main clause is 'le eti' (the man is good), and the relative clause is 'uénw sw' ([that] went). Ui indicates that the relative clause is modifying the word 'le', while ue takes the place of the subject in the relative clause. It makes it easier with Raitoliste's very strict word order.
Ue in a main clause can also be a complementizer, but that doesn't have to do with this.


Well, I'm still not sure I understand; and I don't want to imply that I disagree (what I don't understand I can neither agree with nor disagree with, and what I do understand I agree with); but anyway, here's more information, which may or may not be relevant; if it is, perhaps you can use it to make things clearer to me.

Maybe "ui" is a demonstrative and "ue" is a relativizer.

In many languages, the same word may be both a relativizer and a complementizer, or a relativizer and an "adjunctivizer" (a subordinator used to introduce an adjunct clause ("clausal adverb")), or a complementizer and an "adjunctivizer". There are different terms to label these functions, not because most languages have different words to perform these functions, but only because many do.

And, you already know that a subordinator can also be a conjunction; and that a relativizer can also be a pronoun.

In many languages, subordinators (especially relativizers, but also complementizers and "adjunctivizers") resemble either question-words or demonstratives.

For example:
English complementizer: "that";
English relativizers: "that, which, who";
English adjunctivizers: "when, where".

(Middle English also had adjunctivizers "for why" and "for that", but they fell by the wayside as "by cause that" picked up popularity and became shortened to "because".)

A question-word can also be a pronoun; "which", "who", "what" are often used as pronouns instead of as question-words, and often as question-words and pronouns both at the same time.

Demonstratives can be pronouns; they can also be determiners. Since determiners modify nouns and noun-phrases, they're a lot like adjectives, and some people consider them a kind of adjective; but they form a small, closed class, and some people what "adjectives" to be a large, open class, as much as possible. "That" can be a demonstrative pronoun, or "that" can be a demonstrative determiner; I'm not sure whether it can ever be both at the same time.

If you're writing a dictionary of your language, you have a choice; you can present one of these words with many functions as several different words all of which just happen to sound exactly alike (and to be written exactly alike if your language is written); or you can present it as a single word with many meanings. The latter course of action is probably more realistic IMO, but what do I know?

Anyway: maybe "ui" is a demonstrative and "ue" is a relativizer.

What do you think?
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tolkien_Freak



Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 1231
Location: in front of my computer. always.

PostPosted: Wed May 14, 2008 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ue is probably a relativizer. I don't think ue is a demonstrative, since it's only used with relative clauses and I have another set of words that means 'this/that'.

Ui is definitely a determiner, but beyond that it doesn't really fall into any of the categories that Wikipedia lists under 'determiner'. Maybe it's just that no natlang works like this.

Let me try this explanation: ui takes the place of the entire subordinate clause. Ui indicates what noun the clause modifies, and ue just keeps you from having to repeat the modified noun within the subordinate clause.

(I hate it when you know what you're trying to say and can't figure out how to say it.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
imbecilica



Joined: 09 Jan 2008
Posts: 74

PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2008 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

(English Standard Version - 2002)

1. Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.
2. And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.
3. And they said to one another, "Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly." And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.
4. Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth."
5. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built.
6. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them.
7. Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another's speech."
8. So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city.
9. Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth.

(La Version Estandarda de l'Espiritolà - 2002)

1. Nunia totro mondo abede un lingua ey os modos mesmos.
2. Ey com peplo migratedes da l'esto, lós trovedes un plania á la landa de Shinar ey s'hábituedes á-ý.
3. Ey lós dicquedes á un ey l'inverse, "Venár, fanos os bricos, ey les brulár paruyamiente." Ey lós abedes os bricos por pierros, ey mortâr por bicumena.
4. Donca lós dicquedes, "Venár, nes constroctár un vila ey un torra cuen li'oltâ en face de l'evanos, ey nes fanos un nom, avoique sianos dispersás sora la face de totra terra."
5. Ey lo senior descendede á la terra á vidar la vila ey la torra, de qués los enfantos de l'hómo abado constroctá.
6. Ey lo senior dicquede, "Ý-vidár, lós siados un peplo, ey totros oes abados un lingua, ey cio siado solamiente lo commençamento de qué lós fárados. Ey nadas que lós proposados á fár nunia siados impossibles por oes.
7. Venár, ý-descendanos ey fár confusar lora lingua, por que no povanos comprendar ás linguas d'oes."
8. Só lo senior les dispersede da icca, á totros liós sora la terra, ey lós partedes da constroctar la vila.
9. Ayor, lio nom siede Babel, parque ý, lo senior fedes confusar la lingua de totra terra. Ey da ý, lo senior les dispersede sora totra la terra.

.......................................... Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dusepo



Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Posts: 129

PostPosted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Retfon:
1. Āthanatēm thēne hapas ē misēfon o āthasop vōteq.
2. O gōladotaq ganas fon rete, saq fōnaden ē shatē'thēne tara Shēnā o palēpen pet.
3. O saq mēses ēnatā saq, "Ganas pet, nōq fares baloq, o pēros saq dop." O saq hapas baloq ta shaten, o bētōmen ta vēsēkothēn.
4. run out of time but will finish it later! lol...
_________________
My Website
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yssida



Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 253
Location: sa jaan lang

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.
Nya uka marama ita sula, sidan ita kap k'amam ita hutu yara.

Now-MOD0 land-DIST all -C0, language-C1-DIST one CONJ1-word-C1-DIST same FC0.PFV-have2

or something less verby

Nya uka sula maraman ita, sida ita kap k'amam ita hutu sara.

Now-MOD0 all land-C1-DIST, language-DIST one C0 CONJ-word-DIST C0 same FC1.PFV-have2

let me explain some stuff here:

MOD0 is a tense indicator which is attached to....time indicators. Basically, a time indicator would be similar to adverbs of time in English, that they are absolute. But they are modifiable. Something which pertained to a certain point in time can be given references as if the speaker was on that time period. Consider this: “Now the whole earth had one language.” It clearly refers to some point in the past with reference to its content, yet it uses now as a time indicator. That isn't allowed in Padan speech. Therefore another modifier is needed to align the offending time indicator and make it agree with the content. This is where MOD0 comes along. It is numbered at 0 since absolute tenses are seen linear, with 0 being anywhere behind the point of reference (in this case the writer's as he was writing), and 1 being anywhere on or beyond that point. It follows a rule I call invisible tenses. The verb only has to conform to aspect, as it is seen as most important, with other indicators agreeing with tense, if provided and if absolutely necessary.

C0 is the default 'case' if you will. This is very similar to an absolutive case. C1 is an ergative. You may have noticed that C1 and C0 only switched places in the second sentence, violating ergative logic. The reason for this is that in some verbs, and in particular instances (esp existentials) oblique and absolutive collapse. This is not true for all existentials, and certainly not for all verbs.

DIST, well, remember my take on my language having relative-ish pronouns. Well, that concept was developed and extended further for nouns. They act here as archaicism, and they show a speaker/in this case a writer's relationship to a certain object. This is absolutely necessary in Padan speech as you'd end up sounding like a cold robot using bare nouns/substantives. Here DIST means it identifies personally with the substantive referent. It could mean that he was in the that particular land with that particular language and words.

CONJ1, is basically a garden variety conjunction type thing, which doesn't exactly work as on English. But more on that later.

PERF is basically perfective aspect.

A direct re-translation of this to English would be:

In all of our land, we had one language and the same words.

ps. to eldin, I think I may have found the answer to my question about Tagalog verbs. It seems that ergative and accusative collapsed into NG in Tagalog. It SEEMS....I'm not quite sure yet. But it looks like it.
_________________
kasabot ka ani? aw di tingali ka bisaya mao na

my freewebs site


Last edited by yssida on Wed May 21, 2008 7:58 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
yssida



Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 253
Location: sa jaan lang

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, I forgot to post phonemic and phonetic analysis. Will get to you later Smile
_________________
kasabot ka ani? aw di tingali ka bisaya mao na

my freewebs site
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eldin raigmore
Admin


Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 1621
Location: SouthEast Michigan

PostPosted: Tue May 20, 2008 6:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the analysis and explanation, yssida.

yssida wrote:
PERF is basically perfective aspect.
Because of the problem of confusing "perfective" with "perfect", the abbreviation for "perfective" usually includes a < V > in it somewhere.

Leipzig Glossing Rules wrote:
IMP imperative
IPFV imperfective
PFV perfective
PRF perfect


See also this.
_________________
"We're the healthiest horse in the glue factory" - Erskine Bowles, Co-Chairman of the deficit reduction commission
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Vreleksá Forum Index -> Translations
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Theme ACID © 2003 par HEDONISM Web Hosting Directory


Start Your Own Video Sharing Site

Free Web Hosting | Free Forum Hosting | FlashWebHost.com | Image Hosting | Photo Gallery | FreeMarriage.com

Powered by PhpBBweb.com, setup your forum now!
For Support, visit Forums.BizHat.com