the tale of three brothers

Creativity: Poetry, music, comics, etc.
Kreado: Poezio, muziko, bildrakontoj, ktp.
jan Oma
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:21 pm

the tale of three brothers

Postby jan Oma » Tue Feb 10, 2015 1:08 am

translated from the version featured in the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows movie.

toki pi mije sama tu wan


tenpo pini la mije sama tu wan li lon. tenpo pimeja la ona li tawa e linja tawa. ona li kama tawa telo linja suli. taso ona li sona e nasin kon li pali e linja tawa sewi.

a! jan pimeja li awen e tawa ona. jan Moli li lon. ona li pilin ike tawa mije sama. tenpo mute la jan tawa li moli lon telo. jan Moli li sona ale. wile pakala la ona toki e pali pona pi mije sama. ona ale li kama jo e ijo pana.

mije sama pi nanpa wan li kama jo e ilo utala wawa. tan kasi kiwen la jan Moli li pali e ilo kon.

mije sama pi nanpa tu li kama jo e jan olin ona pi moli. tan telo la jan Moli li pali e ilo kon.

mije sama pini li wile lon e weka tan moli. pilin ike la jan Moli li pana e len pi lukin ala pi ona.

jan pi nanpa wan li tawa e ma tomo li moli e jan ike pi ona. ona li toki suli e wawa ona. tenpo lape la jan ante li moli e ona li kama jo e ilo kon wawa. tan ni la jan Moli li kama jo e mije sama.

mije sama ante li tawa e tomo ona li sike lon luka e kiwen. pona! meli moli pi olin ona li kama. taso jan olin ona li pilin ike. jan pi moli li wile lon e ma moli. ona tawa tan ni. pilin pakala la mije sama li moli. tan ni la jan Moli li kama jo e mije sama.

jan Moli li lukin ale. taso ona li lukin ala e mije sama pini. tenpo mute mute la ona sike e suno. ona li pana e len pi jan Moli tawa jan lili ona. jan Moli en mije sama li tawa poka jan pona ona.

janKipo
Posts: 2958
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:20 pm

Re: the tale of three brothers

Postby janKipo » Tue Feb 10, 2015 3:42 pm

I don't remember the story from the movie, so I checked the book, which seems slightly different. So some of my comments may not be relevant,

tenpo pini la mije sama tu wan li lon. tenpo pimeja la ona li tawa [e] LON linja tawa. ona li kama tawa telo linja suli. taso ona li sona e nasin kon li pali e linja tawa sewi.


'tawa' takes the destination as a complement (no 'e') and the thing moved as DO ('e'). Here the path is neither but merely where the going is going on. 'nasin' means "path, way", 'linja tawa', "going line" works, of course, but is liable to going off on strange byways (railroads, zip lines, and the like). On the other hand, 'nasin sewi' is already well established for "religion" which messes with "bridge". And there might be a surfeit of 'nasin's.

a! jan pimeja li awen e tawa ona. jan Moli li lon. ona li pilin E ike tawa mije sama. tenpo mute la jan tawa li (KAMA) moli lon telo. jan Moli li sona E ale. wile pakala la ona toki e IJO PI pali pona pi mije sama. ona ale li kama jo e ijo pana.


'awen' as a transitive verb means "wait for, keep" . The 'a' does nicely for the suddenness of his appearance, but not the standing in the way. Maybe just 'awen lon nasin' or whatever "stay in the way". I'm not sure what all can go into a 'la' phrase but this motivational condition seems toward the limit. DO of 'toki' is what is actually said, not the subject of it nor the language in which it is said.

mije sama pi nanpa wan li kama jo e ilo utala wawa. tan kasi kiwen la jan Moli li pali e ilo kon.


Here I think the 'tan' phrase clearly belongs at the end, it is not a condition, just the material of the making.

mije sama pi nanpa tu li kama jo e jan olin ona [pi] moli. tan telo la jan Moli li pali e ilo kon.


'pi' needs two words after it. 'moli' should probably be before 'ona'. Again, the 'tan' clause seems to belong at the end. And why 'ilo' rather than 'kiwen' (which was not made from the water but just taken)?

mije sama pini li wile [lon e] weka tan moli. pilin ike la jan Moli li pana e len pi lukin ala [pi] TAWA ona.


'pi' again. this psychological condition is novel again. "apparel of not seeing" is more like a blindfold. but passives are hard in tp, so you strictly have to go to a relative clause: len ni: jan li len e len ni la jan ala li ken lukin e ona'. It seems a lot of leeway is allowed until a problem arises.

jan pi nanpa wan li tawa [e] ma tomo li moli e jan ike [pi] ona. ona li toki suli e IJO PI wawa ona. tenpo lape la jan ante li moli e ona li kama jo e ilo kon wawa. tan ni la jan Moli li kama jo e mije sama.


Destination is complement (no 'e') of 'tawa'. 'pi' is NOT "of" in the genitive sense but merely a marker of a right grouped unit within a left grouping modifier string, so it always has at least two words after it, since a single word is already grouped. "talk about X" is 'toki e ijo (pi) X'

mije sama ante li tawa e tomo ona li sike /lon luka/ e kiwen. pona! meli moli pi olin ona li kama. taso jan olin ona li pilin ike. jan [pi] moli li wile lon [e] ma moli. ona LI tawa tan ni. pilin pakala la mije sama li (KAMA) moli. tan ni la jan Moli li kama jo e mije sama.


prepositional phrase comes after DO. I think that 'x li sike e y' means that x goes around y, not that x turns y, but then I don't know how to say the latter. place with 'lon' is like destination with 'tawa', complement, not DO.

jan Moli li lukin LON? ale. taso ona li lukin ala e mije sama pini. tenpo mute mute la ona sike e suno. ona li pana e len pi jan Moli tawa jan lili ona. jan Moli en mije sama li tawa poka jan pona ona,


reduplication again. I would have ended with 'tawa sama jan pona'.

jan Oma
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 1:21 pm

Re: the tale of three brothers

Postby jan Oma » Tue Feb 10, 2015 5:16 pm

So, if the 'la' constructions are a little weird, how would you show motivation or deceit?

janKipo
Posts: 2958
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:20 pm

Re: the tale of three brothers

Postby janKipo » Tue Feb 10, 2015 5:50 pm

The obvious answers involve modifiers on either the subject or the verb. But each of these has disadvantages in some cases, so the ,la'phrase may be the best place. it is just novel for now.

janKipo
Posts: 2958
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:20 pm

Re: the tale of three brothers

Postby janKipo » Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:03 pm

Somewhere in my comments here (and in a couple of other places which I can't find now), I said or implied something really dumb, namely that Verbs can't have a passive meaning in tp. The instant case was that 'len pi lukin ala' had to mean '"clothes of not seeing","blindfold", say, not ""clothes of not being seen", "cloak of invisibility" in this case. In fact, of course, the passive sense (or the related potential) is often the most common for Verbs as modifiers: 'soweli moku' is more likely and edible animal one that is eating, and the same applies pretty much across the board. Of course, the active sense (and its habitual forms) are also possible and even common.
Two factors seem to have contributed to this momentary (I hope) lapse on my part. The first is the fact that tp does not have a passive construction. There is no pattern like going from "The man hunted the duck" to "The duck was hunted by the man". Indeed, no preposition (or other word pushed into service) covers the agentive function of "by" on a regular basis. We do have, for example, 'tan' for authorship, for example, but that is about source rather than agent. And no verb form or construction regularly indicates the shifting roles of agent and patient (if that is what they are). But secondly, what we have when we consider such situations are systematic ambiguities which do not obviously lend themselves to systematic resolutions. What we can get from 'jan li alasa e waso' is both 'jan li alasa' and 'waso li alasa', from "The man hunts the duck" to "The man hunts" and "The duck is hunted" or, at least "The duck is game". But, of course, the duck hunts as well -- for minnows, say, so the issue is not immediately resolvable by knowledge of the different subjects (and remember all those thrillers about table turning beasts:"The hunter has become the hunted", which in tp is just "jan alasa li kama jan alasa" -- another case of antilogy akin to the proposal to make 'lukin' the word for "seek" 'mi lukin e ijo li lukin ala e ona' "I am looking for it but don't see it").
This problem has been known for tp from the start (does 'jan li moku' mean that he is eating or that he is food?) but has come to the fore as more detailed grammars are being constructed. Are we to take the man and the duck cases to be grammatically the same, with an ambiguous word at its core or are we to take them as grammatically different (Subject/Verb and Subject/Modifier(or Noun)) with homonymous insertions. The story so far seems to be of Nicene complexity, involving the same word but different roles and the roles treated in a variety of ways.
Sorry to have gone on like this. This apologize seems to have become the outline of the first draft of an essay. But back to the point. Sorry for my comment; your line was pefectly fine, just stepping into a mare's nest.


Return to “musi”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron