Guild of Linguists

Click here to edit subtitle

Forums

Post Reply
Forum Home > The Language Room > One sentence in D'ni

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

Huh, I must have mistyped the thing. Well, that's what happens if you have to try and write from an unfamiliar and counter-intuitive standard...

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


April 4, 2014 at 12:06 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Korov’ev
Member
Posts: 160

If you use Notepad++, I’ve made a few macros to convert between standards (see the Fonts link in my signature).

--

  46116   —  D’ní notesFontsGoodies
.fa  mEstav  Kat  Kenen  xanril  fUru

April 4, 2014 at 4:01 PM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

Thanks Korov! Also, if it's fine by you, I'll add the CSUR font to the D'ni Resources page.

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


April 4, 2014 at 6:13 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Orz
Member
Posts: 15

My hardware failure has been remedied, and with surprisingly little loss of data. I am further pleased to be able to inform you that RAWA responded to my followup questions while I was effectively incapacitated! I include it here without further comment.


 

> No problem. As you know, my translation hat has several years of dust

> on it. I did my best to blow all the dust off, but the chance of

> making an error at this point is relatively high. :)

>

> tomanatEomE - correct as is. tomahn = house; Tomahna = home

>

> roodsh - also correct as is. It was one of the very first words

> translated into D'ni for an early draft of the Book of Atrus, though I

> don't think it ended up being used in the novel itself.

>

> zo'e'os - also correct as is. An apostrophe after a consonant (e.g.

> "D'ni") is a schva (minimal vowel); an apostrophe after a vowel is a

> glottal stop (e.g. the dash in "uh-oh").

>

> KobolKEbaen is singluar (he/she), as I translated the "Who" at the

> beginning of the sentence to be singular based on the context of the

> phrase. The other verbs were plural (homes/fortunes/children

> were(they), etc.).

>

> Hope that helps, 

> RAWA

 


 

 


April 13, 2014 at 4:37 PM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

Hm, I'm going to be very resistant to roodsh without a second vowel, as it violates the neat phonotactics I've formulated based on literally every other published word. I swear, Rawa has never heard of linguistics.

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


April 13, 2014 at 4:46 PM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

Have our various resources been updated to include the new words yet? I know I haven't got around to the on-site dictionary, and I've just seen that Kh'rees has not for his, but what about the study resources?

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


April 22, 2014 at 2:06 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Korov’ev
Member
Posts: 160

Oops, I forgot :| I should be able to upload them in the afternoon.

In brief, the essential additions are the 3rd person object pronoun, the 2nd plural possessive and the subjunctive marker; maybe an example for gopa? I’d let the rule for vúhí be, as this is the first time we’ve seen it before the verb.

--

  46116   —  D’ní notesFontsGoodies
.fa  mEstav  Kat  Kenen  xanril  fUru

April 23, 2014 at 4:17 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Korov’ev
Member
Posts: 160

Online!

--

  46116   —  D’ní notesFontsGoodies
.fa  mEstav  Kat  Kenen  xanril  fUru

April 23, 2014 at 11:55 AM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

Yay!

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


April 23, 2014 at 12:11 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Khreestrefah
Member
Posts: 96

I am glad to see RAWA came through with this translation of Orz's sentence :--)


Here are a couple of preliminary observations:


kobol- 'would have' looks like it is composed of our familiar tense/aspect prefixes ko- + bo- + l(e)- in an order previously unattested.  If we think of these as being "petrified" modal verbs then there is an interestng parallel here with the history of the English verb would.  This is in origin the past-tense form of the verb will, much as, if bo- were a verb stem meaning 'will' then kobo- would be the past-tense form of such a verb.


The D'ni future is often used simply to express a belief or guess about a future occurrence, but it can also be used to express the intention of the subject, as in Kadish's bomahnshoo tomet te eest 'I will die here with them'.  A natural extension of this idea is to consider the subject's intention as it was in a past time-frame, especially where the intent differs in some way from the present outcome.  In such a context future intention in the past is practically the same as past subjunctive:


"he intended to obey her (but something else occurred)" =

"he would have obeyed her (but something else occurred)."


Of course the English syntax has diverged further from the underlying pattern as a consequence of would ceasing to be readily analyzable by the speaker as future in the past, and becoming a unitary morpheme, while in D'ni kobo- would continue to be felt as having the structure ko-bo- in contrast with the combinations ko-do- ; bo-do- ; and bo-ko-.


roodsh 'red' is interesting phonotactically, but also (pre)historically.  The form is remarkably close to the Proto-Indo-European root *rudh- 'red'


Shorah,

Kh'reestrefah 

June 2, 2014 at 3:21 AM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

I'd never thought of them as being old modals, but it does make sense, especially when you consider that another probable modal, chahn, also only appears prefixed.

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


June 3, 2014 at 6:03 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Khreestrefah
Member
Posts: 96

oyn - to assess Korov’ev’s suggestion about this word (presumably somehow distinct from gopah ‘because’ as Kathryn noted) I took another look at the end of Atrus’s Prayer. It occurred to me obliquely that since morpah is ‘queen’ (i.e. royal wife and mother) then mor’okh’mor might mean ‘grandmother’.

 

If so then mor’okh’mor kokenen remesfet could be something like ‘grandmother was demanding/insistent’, alluding to the fact that Anna required Atrus to think through very carefully the implications of what he attempted to write.  

 

It could still be that oyn is some other conjunction. But it also seems possible that a common construction like ‘X is thankful (that) Y did something’ can drop the conjunction. If so there is something else in the sentence *ken chevet mor’okh’mor kokenen remesfet that Atrus might have wanted to make explicit, and that is the fact that grandmother’s demands were imposed on him.  So oyn might mean something like ‘for my sake’.

 

June 9, 2014 at 12:17 AM Flag Quote & Reply

KathTheDragon
Site Owner
Posts: 381

That's a brilliant analysis, Khrees. I think we all missed the (frankly, quite obvious) connection between [i]morpah[/i] and [i]mor[/i] because we all wanted to break down the first word as [i]m-orpah[/i]. If your theory is right, then we have two or three further words - [i]mor[/i] 'mother' and analogically from [i]porpah[/i], [i]por[/i] 'father', and maybe then also [i]por'okh'por[/i] 'grandfather'. And of course, there is a thread for such suggestions...

--

Moula KI: 00005310
DI KI: 00205116
deviantART: kathaveara
tumblr: kaththedragon

Grand Master of the Guild of Linguists


June 9, 2014 at 2:21 AM Flag Quote & Reply

Khreestrefah
Member
Posts: 96

inay 'more than' -- it occurs to me that this might be related to nayvoo 'ten'.  The number word could have originally meant something like 'five more'.


zo'e  --  I am wondering if there could be a connection between the e in zo'e'os gimit 'their immediate loss' and the e in the first word of  "thoe kenem, how are you?"   The former is somewhat unusual in that the possessive pronoun is being used objectively rather than subjectively, i.e. it means 'their being lost by someone' rather then 'their losing something'.  In the latter case the English translation is somewhat idiomatic.  It could be understood as elliptical for 'how are you doing?'; but that in turn is only grammatically active, and is really a question about whether what is happening to you is having a good or bad effect.

June 22, 2014 at 1:22 AM Flag Quote & Reply

You must login to post.

Oops! This site has expired.

If you are the site owner, please renew your premium subscription or contact support.