| Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
| D'ni Linguistic Fellowship > Uru: Ages Beyond Myst > Classroom Note Revealed (XP1 SPOILER) |
| Posted by: khrees June 06, 2010 02:16 am |
| Since access to the Cavern is available again, there may be some topics that members (both new and old) would like to discuss. One thing that most of us who have been to D'ni and are interested in the languages will have noticed is shown in the image at the following link. . . . . . . [MYST ONLINE SPOILER WARNING] . . . . . . . . http://www.eldalamberon.com/BurntClassroomNote.jpg Several years ago, an alternate "instance" of our Age was discovered in which the note in question had not been burnt, or else an image was preserved of the note before it was partially destroyed, and the full D'ni text was revealed here and discussed by members of the DLF at great length. Now only beginning of that discussion survives -- you can read it at the following link: http://web.archive.org/web/20071203030837/linguists.bahro.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=148 Domahreh's initial interpretation of the text is well worth reading, and Zardoz's thoughts on the stylistic clues to its authorship. But there remain some linguistic problems in this text, and some key evidence on certain points of D'ni grammar, which have not been "solved" with complete satisfaction (and much of the earlier discussion is now lost); so I think this text merits further discussion. I'll start things off by noting that the title of the text (still visible in the damaged document, except for part of the first letter) is: Kenen gor [K]enen Gor This clearly means "It Is Time," with regard to which it can be noted that D'ni does not express the abstract 3rd person pronoun 'it' that we use in such expressions in English, though on the other hand the fact that the verb kenen 'he/she/it is' is a 3rd person singular verb is marked in D'ni by the ending -en. The first two lines of text introduce the theme of the text and the grammatical pattern that much of it repeats: .Kenen gor kreKantinaloTtE b'Sento Ulintav xo D'nE .Kenen gor kreKantintantE b'Ken Sentomeij [.kenen gor khrekah]ntinahlothtee b'shento oolintahv tso d'nee [.kenen gor kh]rekahntintahntee b'ken shentomeij We know what most of this means: "It is time for the kahntinahloths to take oolintahv of D'ni. It is time for the kahntintahns to be taken from." Two of the uncertain nouns are clearly related, and must derive ultimately from a verb kahntin, of which kahntintahn is clearly the agent noun. We now have a parallel to the formation of kahntinahloth in the noun nekisahloth = 'one who is bent, twisted, distorted' derived from adjectival nekisahl = 'bent, twisted, distorted'. This in turn can be compared to an adjective like fahlah'ahl 'folded' (in dayjee fahlah'ahl 'folded path, labyrinth') derived from the verb fahlah = 'I fold". So apparently kahntinahloth is the term for one who undergoes or suffers the action of the verb kahntin which is performed by a kahntintahn. The suggestion that has been made is that this refers to the plight of the Bahro at the hands of the D'ni, and that these sentences are saying in effect that the Bahro should take back control of D'ni. Any thoughts? Shorah, Kh'reestrefah |
| Posted by: Talashar August 25, 2010 05:46 pm |
| I hadn't noticed the fact that both kahntintahn and kahntinahloth exist, and it seems to me very suggestive for the meaning of -ahloth, which I've been puzzling over recently. The only -ahloth form I know that we have a meaning for is nekisahloth, which seems to be derived as follows: nekis: to twist. By itself this is ambiguous! The English verb can be either intransitive or transitive, and the subject switches from patient to agent accordingly. nekisahl: twisted. Since this is the active participle of nekis, the only confirmed definition for the original verb is the intransitive form, in which the subject is the patient. That is, I nekis, therefore I am nekisahl. nekisahloth: twisted one. Equivalent to both the subject and the patient of nekis. The problem is that most verbs aren't like nekis, and the subject and patient are very distinct. So which does -oth signify? The Kenen Gor text seems to contrast an agent kahntintahn with a patient kahntinahloth, and answer the question in favor of patient. |
| Posted by: khrees September 04, 2010 05:17 pm |
| I think Talashar is right about the contrast between kahntintahn and kahntinahloth, that -tahn marks the agent and -ahloth marks the patient for verbs whose meaning makes the agent and patient clearly distinct, i.e. for verbs whose meaning is fundamentally transitive. On the other hand, the parallelism of the translated words and phrases nekisahl 'bent, twisted, or distorted'; bah'ro nekisahl 'the Bent Bahro'; and nekisahloth 'one who is bent, twisted, or distorted', seems pretty compelling. It suggests that, if kahntinahloth does refer to the enslaved bah'ro, i.e. = *'one who is oppressed or enslaved', then by analogy *bah'ro kahntinahl = 'the Enslaved Bahro'. Another resemblance of the adjective/participle nekisahl and derived noun nekisahloth would be to other nouns derived from adjectives, e.g. gahro 'mighty' > Garoth 'Mighty One'; kerah 'brave' > Kerath 'Brave One'; enyalo 'sick' > Renyaloth 'the sickly one'. This suggests that the present participle or verbal adjective formed in -ahl describes the quality that a person or thing has by virtue of its participation in the action or state described by the verb. For a transitive verb this seem to characterize the patient. With a strictly intransitive verb this would naturally characterize a subject of the verb, being the only necessary participant, e.g. repoytee tsoidahl 'the glowing bulbs'. This raises the question of whether there is present participle or adjectival form which when derived from a strictly transitive verb would characterize the agent of the verb. Perhaps this is what we have in an adjective like chevet 'thankful'. In Atrus's Prayer he is himself the subject of the verb chev when he says g’chev ah’shem khekam l’ahrtahem 'and I thank you for what you have done'. He begins the next sentence with ken chevet 'I am thankful'. Shorah, Khrees |
| Posted by: Talashar September 05, 2010 01:49 pm |
| Unfortunately I can't think of many verbs which we know to be transitive or semantically transitive and which have examples of an -ahl form. Tseemah works, and the non-active analysis of -ahl might make more sense of reahreeutahv tsahroo tseemahahl the-protection ? need-AHL 'the protection needed' But it's hard to say without knowing for sure the role that tsahroo has in this phrase. |