[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
Finally, critique of verses 7-9, plus thoughts on pronouns: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Verse 7 Come! We will descend and we will confuse their language there, that [they] will not hear [one] man the language [of] his friend. "Ven! Gozi fu dimkoja kay payrofa kuyde bol cu, vopor ke kuy bu fu gemaynde boltiq. 7.0: Cool! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Verse 8 And YHWH scattered them from there on the face of all the earth, and they ceased to build the city. Hi ti jawe pa fentir kuy vofrom cu ko kuljay hu sta dunya, hifoloco kuy pa par ke baw to ceq. 8.1: Does "hifoloco" mean 'therefore'? It's not listed in the vocab as a compound. 8.2: "hu sta danya" = 'on the face of the earth'. Okay. But see my comments on verse 9. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Verse 9 Therefore called its name "Babel," because there YHWH confused the language of all the earth, and from there YHWH scattered them on the face of all the earth. Hifuco, to turu kyamho "ti bepayro," cefaco ke ti jawe pa payrofa to bol hu pukul to dunya behu, kay juy pa fentir kuy ko kuljay vosta to dunya. 9.1: "hifuco" is also 'therefore'? Not present in vocab. 9.2: "cefaco" is 'because'? Not present in vocab. (Nice word, that one.) 9.3: "vosta to dunya"... why different from the verse 8 form? If I understand "hu" and "vo" right, I think "hu" is what's needed here. This is not a verb (or verbal preposition) phrase that modifies "pa fentir" directly; it modifies "kuljay" as a subordinate clause, doesn't it? Also, "to" is okay to indicate that we're talking about the world that we all know, but it could certainly be omitted in casual speech. In sum, I would translate the phrase as "hu sta to dunya". ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regarding the earlier corrections that you replied to, I'm cool with your responses. Please put "vo" into the vocab when you get a chance, along with the other candidates mentioned above. ----------------- I am still stumbling over the Cuy pronouns. It may be that a scheme of 'they-most-recently-mentioned', 'they-next-most-recently- mentioned'... pronouns will develop, or perhaps just 'they- first', 'they-second'..., or maybe 'they-subject', 'they-object'....? A tough one. How does Mandarin, or other languages that feature fewer pronouns than English, such as Turkish or Hungarian, avoid confusion? Or here's a thought about pronoun usage. When we first use a noun or name, we don't necessarily know that we'll want to use an anaphor for it later. When we do, sometimes we reinforce just which noun is being associated with the anaphor. Then from that point forward, we just use the anaphor: Jim and Joe met John. But he - Joe - said he had to leave to pick up his kids. Once we've established clearly that 'he' = 'Joe', we're free to use it unencumbered the rest of the way. The listener doesn't have to apply a rule based on different forms of 'he'; we give the listener the rule explicitly. I feel as though any anaphor scheme, including the Cuy scheme, might benefit from this explicit restatement ability. What do you think? --Krawn