toki! 'Sup!

Community: Meet and greet, introductions, networking, gatherings, events, what's new in your life?
Komunumo: Interkoniĝo, sinprezentoj, socia retumado, renkontiĝoj, eventoj, kio novas en via vivo?
User avatar
janSen
Posts: 6
Joined: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:23 pm

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby janSen » Thu Mar 04, 2010 8:05 pm

toki jan Inli o!

jan Inli
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:13 am

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby jan Inli » Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:54 am

janKipo wrote:Just a side point that goes back to the earliest translations. The god of Gen 1 is not Jahweh (or whatever) but Elohim (which is strictly plural, hence all the first person plurals that follow. Notice there is no LORD here, the usual cover for Jahweh, Adonai).


It may have a plural form, but it most definitely is functioning as a singular.

The rest is more theology than I want to get into at the moment, since we are mainly translating an English translation here (or several such) and we can stick to that. I would hope that the tp trat will end up being more inclusive or not sex specific (God doesn't have a penis, after all -- or anything else, come to that), though just how to do the Trinity is a problem -- not one we need deal with in the OT however (or the NT, for that matter, really).


Well, I think that TP would have a problem with the Trinity only because the Trinity doctrine distinguishes between "being" and "person"; God is one being who is three persons. So saying jan sewi [Jawe] li jan tu wan is a bit strange. :)

Also, some people would disagree with you about God having a penis; but, I agree with you lol :)

But, yes, as my lecturer once said, "all translation is interpretation". ;)

jan Inli
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:13 am

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby jan Inli » Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:59 am

janSen wrote:toki jan Inli o!


toki jan Sen o! :)

sina kin jan sin pi kulupu ni. :)

janMato
Posts: 1544
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:21 pm
Location: Takoma Park, MD
Contact:

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby janMato » Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:14 am

jan Inli wrote:sina kin li jan sin pi kulupu ni. :)

kin directly modifies "sina", so subject isn't entirely on it's own so "li" is required. I still think this is a difficult rule.

jan Inli
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:13 am

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby jan Inli » Fri Mar 05, 2010 9:28 am

janMato wrote:
jan Inli wrote:sina kin li jan sin pi kulupu ni. :)

kin directly modifies "sina", so subject isn't entirely on it's own so "li" is required. I still think this is a difficult rule.


Thanks :)

I learn slowly but surely. :P

janKipo
Posts: 2846
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:20 pm

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby janKipo » Fri Mar 05, 2010 11:27 am

Not to get into theology (Heaven forfend!), but it is not clear just how the plural functions as a singular (it takes plural verb forms, plural pronouns, etc.) I suppose we could go with the royal (well, divine) "we" or we could say that the scribes had a clear monotheism in mind when they copied this older text into the present mishmash (but the older text is not so clearly monotheistic and "Elohim" turns up other places where it clearly is plural in intent).
tp is not alone in having problems with the Trinity, of course, but you do raise an interesting point. I suppose we could use 'lon' and 'jan' for contrast, but that then muddles issues of Christology. In tp's role as an eliminator of verbal debris, this may be the point where it could be useful: it shows that it can't really be said and so refrains (unlike Athanasius et al) from saying it.
The people who think God has a penis also believe that he is a spirit and I maintain that a spiritual penis is, for practical purposes, not a penis at all (skippiing over Mary and the ear bit).

User avatar
jan Ote
Posts: 424
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 1:15 am
Location: ma Posuka
Contact:

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby jan Ote » Fri Mar 05, 2010 12:13 pm

Fortunatelly, in toki pona we don't have to distinguish singular nad plural when it's not needed (or we don't want to).
jan sewi li pali e ma
God(s) created the earth.
God(s) is/are creating the earth.
Neither sex:
jan sewi li pali e ma
Goddess(es) is/are creating the earth.
God(s)-without-sex/-bi-sex/-tri-sex is/are creating the earth.

As to the Trinity: you're 100% right, jan Kipo. No language taking its origin from human experience can work well when describing the Trinity, because this concept is against our experience, logic, then - language.

The last bit of your post, jan Kipo, just thrown me down from my chair to the floor. Couldn't resist.

jan Inli
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 9:13 am

Re: toki! 'Sup!

Postby jan Inli » Fri Mar 05, 2010 1:16 pm

janKipo wrote:Not to get into theology (Heaven forfend!), but it is not clear just how the plural functions as a singular (it takes plural verb forms, plural pronouns, etc.) I suppose we could go with the royal (well, divine) "we" or we could say that the scribes had a clear monotheism in mind when they copied this older text into the present mishmash (but the older text is not so clearly monotheistic and "Elohim" turns up other places where it clearly is plural in intent).


Well, in parts of Genesis 1, I definitely think that אלהים is being used as a singular to represent one being because the verbs used with it (ברא) are singular. Other texts, on the other hand, I do think use אלהים as a plural. For example, the cohortative plural in Gen. 1:26-7 may represent strands of older polytheistic ideas of the divine council.

tp is not alone in having problems with the Trinity, of course, but you do raise an interesting point. I suppose we could use 'lon' and 'jan' for contrast, but that then muddles issues of Christology. In tp's role as an eliminator of verbal debris, this may be the point where it could be useful: it shows that it can't really be said and so refrains (unlike Athanasius et al) from saying it.
The people who think God has a penis also believe that he is a spirit and I maintain that a spiritual penis is, for practical purposes, not a penis at all (skippiing over Mary and the ear bit).


Certain people believe God has a literal body, and that spirit is just a purer/finer form of the 'matter' which we know. But, yeh, I just finished a module where the Mary-ear thing played a big part; it amused me.


Return to “jan pi toki pona”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron