We’re gearing up for the 2012 CAG Conference in Palm Springs! OCC GATE will be there this weekend. Follow us on Twitter to see what’s going on. If you’re at the CAG conference and you’re on Twitter, use the hashtag #CAG12 for the CAG Conference. Hope to see you there!
CAG 2012
February 29, 2012 — David PetersonWe’re gearing up for the 2012 CAG Conference in Palm Springs! OCC GATE will be there this weekend. Follow us on Twitter to see what’s going on. If you’re at the CAG conference and you’re on Twitter, use the hashtag #CAG12 for the CAG Conference. Hope to see you there!
Share and Enjoy
Fape
February 29, 2012 — David J. Peterson
fape
- (adj.) smooth
- (n.) smoothness
- (v.) to be smooth
Ale fape ia ima!
“Because you’re so smooth!”
Notes: Heh, heh. From that Santana song that came out a few years back. Of course, the Kamakawi word implies “smooth to the touch”, not “smooth” as in “smooth operator”.
To me it’s clear that there should be different words for this and for gentle (yesterday’s word). There’s also a third idea that I think also deserves its own word, and it’s something like “sleek”. What it means is both smooth and wet. My ideal for this concept is a dolphin’s skin (in the water). Provided it doesn’t make that awful rubbery sound like a balloon, a dolphin’s skin (while wet) is the ideal surface, and it’d be nice if everything in the world was like that. As it is, we have to deal with all these horrible rough surfaces. Just…awful…
Demonstratives
February 28, 2012 — David J. PetersonIn some of our IRC chats, Qvaak has asked me to go over demonstratives in Dothraki, so I’ll aim to do that today.
A demonstrative is a word like “this” that’s used in front of nouns or noun phrases. In English, we have these four common demonstratives:
- Give me this book. (Nearby, Singular)
- Give me that book. (Not Nearby, Singular)
- Give me these books. (Nearby, Plural)
- Give me those books. (Not Nearby, Plural)
Notice that the plural demonstratives above agree with the noun in plurality, but don’t actually mark plurality (i.e. you can’t say “Give me those book”). With that in mind, though, the English demonstratives encode two properties: number (singular vs. plural), and distance (nearby vs. not nearby).
In English, you may also use the demonstratives by themselves as demonstrative pronouns. They look just the same and can be used without nouns. The sentence above, then, would look like this:
- Give me this. (Nearby, Singular)
- Give me that. (Not Nearby, Singular)
- Give me these. (Nearby, Plural)
- Give me those. (Not Nearby, Plural)
Dothraki demonstratives, as modifiers, encode only one property: distance. Unlike English (but like many, many natural languages), Dothraki distinguishes three different distances: near to the speaker, near to the addressee, and near to neither. Demonstrative modifiers in Dothraki different from adjectival modifiers in that they precede the nouns they modify, rather than follow them. Using arakh instead of “book”, here are some sentences illustrating the distinctions made in Dothraki:
- Azhas anhaan jin arakh. “Give me this arakh.” (Near Speaker)
- Azhas anhaan haz arakh. “Give me that arakh.” (Near Addressee)
- Azhas anhaan rek arakh. “Give me that arakh.” (Near Neither)
Note that the form of the demonstrative doesn’t change regardless of the plurality of the the noun, as shown below:
- Anha tih rek hrakkares. “I saw that lion.”
- Anha tih rek hrakkaris. “I saw those lions.”
If you want to use the demonstratives by themselves as stand-alone pronouns, however, the forms do change, unlike in English. Basically, in order to use a demonstrative as a pronoun, one needs to know the animacy of the intended referent. The demonstrative then declines as a noun would that matched in animacy. The animate form for each demonstrative pronoun adds -ak to the end of the demonstrative in the nominative, and the inanimate adds an -i. The animate forms decline like any consonant-final animate noun, and the inanimate form declines like the relative pronoun fini (its declension is shown here). Below are some examples:
- Hazi zhokwae. “That (thing) is big.”
- Azhas rek anhaan. “Give that (thing) to me.”
- Azhas mae hazakaan. “Give it to that (one).”
- Jinak simon anni. “This is my uncle.”
Notice also the difference here between a copular phrase and a noun phrase:
- Jini havzi. “This is a cat.”
- jin havzi “this cat”
Regarding when to use which demonstrative, it’s fairly straightforward, given a specific circumstance. Let’s say we had two nameless interlocutors in a bizarre, Photoshop-esque landscape with multi-colored bones, as shown below:
Let’s take our speaker as the dark red dude. If he wants to refer to the orange bone, he says jin tolorro. If he wants to refer to the green bone, he says haz tolorro. If he wants to refer to the blue bone, he says rek tolorro. Simple enough. Now let’s look at a different scenario:
In this scenario, if the speaker is still the red dude and the addressee is still the yellow dude, the same exact demonstratives are used as were used in the previous example (jin for orange; haz for green; rek for blue). If his addressee is the pinkish dude, though, you’d use haz for blue and rek for green. The choice will be determined by who’s being spoken to, not how close the thing is to the speaker, necessarily.
Now how about if the red dude is speaking to both of those other dudes at the same time. In that instance, you’d use haz for both and point or further specify with words if necessary. Since both addressees are being addressed at once, anything that’s near either of them will be considered close enough to warrant haz.
Now let’s throw in a further wrinkle:
A new light blue bone has fallen from the sky! Let’s say that the red dude is addressing the yellow dude and the pink dude is just there. In this case, the red dude will refer to both blue bones with rek. The reason is that the green bone is still present. As it’s the closest to the addressee, it will get haz. This leaves rek to handle both of the bones that are further away, and the speaker will have to further specify if further specification is required.
Now how about this scenario:
Now the red dude is thinking about the light blue bone from the last picture. In this case, the red dude refers to the light blue bone with rek. Presumably he could only do so if the light blue bone was known to both he and the yellow dude (otherwise he would need to introduce it into the discourse), but once it’s a part of the shared experience of speaker and addressee, it can be referred to with a demonstrative. As the addressee has a bone that’s near at hand (the green bone), it gets haz, leaving rek for the light blue bone.
Now how about this scenario:
Yellow dude was out for his morning ride (around the green bone like every morning), when he sees that his friend red dude is lying on the ground in distress. He dismounts and walks past the green bone to get a closer look. Red dude, for whatever reason, has been incapacitated, and, as he gurgles out, the only thing that will save him is the orange bone that’s relatively near at hand. What the red dude does, then, is refers to the orange bone with haz, rather than jin, in order to imply to the yellow dude that the orange bone is not, in fact, nearby. Though it may be physically quite close, in this instance, it’s further than his body will take him, and so he uses haz to indicate that. If he were to refer to the green bone for any reason, then, he’d use rek, even though it’s quite close to the addressee.
This kind of gives you an idea how to choose between the three demonstratives of Dothraki. This same schema applies to non-physical elements, such as discourse topics. So, for example, if a speaker has an idea about something, he may refer to that idea with jin (as it’s a produce of the speaker’s imagination, the idea is, metaphorically speaking, near at hand). An idea that an addressee has come up with, then, can be referred to with haz. Something that’s to be introduced to the discourse (which is, perhaps, the product of neither speaker nor addressee) can be referred to with rek.
In addition, due to the nature of this spatial metaphor, a Dothraki can actually give opinions about another’s idea by using a different demonstrative. So, for example:
- Hazi dirge davra! “That’s a good idea!”
- Reki dirge toki! “That’s a stupid idea!”
Both ideas are the product of the same person, but by using reki in the second sentence, the speaker has attempted to place the idea even further out of the discourse space, making it seem bizarre (and, thereby, unacceptable). And, of course, a speaker can take that the other way, using jin to make it seem like they had something to do with the idea, even though someone else came up with it.
As this post is getting a bit long, I’m going to cut it off here, but it’s a start! Consider this an introduction to deixis in Dothraki. More will follow in future posts.
Una
February 28, 2012 — David J. Peterson
una
- (adj.) gentle
- (n.) gentleness
- (v.) to be gentle
Una ia!
“Be gentle!”
Notes: This iku is a bit of a mystery. It contains neither u nor na, and almost kind of looks like fupu. I’m pretty sure the two words aren’t related (why would they be?), but I’m not sure just what I was thinking here… Of course, the “good” circle determinative is used, so it’s clear that this means something positive, but how the rest of it is supposed to relate to una I have no idea.
The thing is, looking at this, I know I had some specific idea in mind. But what was it?!
OH!
Oh, duh. And, yeah, that makes perfect sense.
Okay, never mind. This iku is built off the iku for kopu. It means “hand” and also “to feel” or “to touch”. By adding the “good” circle determinative, then, it means “good to touch” or “soft to the touch”—hence “gentle”. Makes perfect sense.
(By the way, if you go back and check out that post on kopu, I have since purchased my wife an Oven Squirrel.)
Fene
February 27, 2012 — David J. Peterson
fene
- (adj.) brief
- (n.) brevity
- (v.) to be brief
A fene hala’i.
“Life is short.”
Notes: Brevity seems like a concept central to human experience, as it defines just about everything we can experience. For that reason I decided to make it a basic term in Kamakawi. It might seem a little bizarre to have it be a central concept (specifically brevity as it relates to time), but that’s why this is an artlang.
Fupu
February 26, 2012 — David J. Peterson
fupu
- (n.) spider
A ile ei iu fupu.
“I hate spiders.”
Notes: Bleh. I do. I hate them. I hate them and I fear them—and they disgust me! It’s pretty much the worst thing in the world, me and spiders. I gave them what I thought was the stupidest-sounding word in the world (fupu) in order to try to sap their strength. It didn’t work. They still have the power to utterly destroy me.
It’s too bad the iku actually ended up looking pretty all right… I mean it’s not bad.
Blech. Oh well. Lousy spiders…
Utaka
February 25, 2012 — David J. Peterson
utaka
- (adj.) ordinary, common, commonplace, usual
- (n.) a plant or animal that is common to a particular region (not necessarily native/indigenous)
- (v.) to be common, to be ordinary, to be usual
- (v.) to cover, to be all over (something)
Au utaka katava i Kalivónia Eiliki.
“Palm trees are ubiquitous to Southern California.”
Notes: Though you wouldn’t know it by looking outside today (which is, actually, two days in the future from the date it says on this post). Raining like a rain parade outside! It’ll happen in the winter, of course, but this one came out of nowhere. It’s been hot here! Like a mini summer!
This is one of those iku that I’m not particularly proud of. The “W” shape of the u is truncated, and the whole thing looks a bit haphazard. Clearly this iku was built because I wanted more with ta in them (because that one’s one of my favorites), but it didn’t come off so naturally. Oh well. It’s here to stay!
Nuku
February 24, 2012 — David J. Peterson
nuku
- (n.) a go-between for married couples
E kaneko ie nuku oieika
“The cat is our nuku.”
Notes: HAPPY CATURDAY!!!
Keli has a new chair, and she found herself a new little blanket to go with it:
Today’s word is a unique one, I think. The word describes a person integral to Kamakawi marriage. See, when two Kamakawi get married, they have a nuku. This nuku is usually an older woman (though not always) who’s either a widow or has been married many years, and who usually is not directly related to either the bride or the groom. The job of the nuku (who doesn’t live with the couple, but drops by from time to time) is to not only help married people settle in to married life, but to covertly pass messages back and forth between couples—usually things that one doesn’t want to say to the other directly.
For example, let’s say the wife discovers that her husband snores loudly in his sleep, but doesn’t want to say anything. She tells the nuku privately, and then some time later (not the next day, but maybe a couple days later), the nuku comes by when just the husband is there and gives him several bits of advice. She might say, “Always rinse your hands after you’ve been cleaning fish”, and, “Don’t stomp around so loudly in the morning”, and, “Don’t eat opeope right before bed”, and, in addition to all that, “Don’t sleep flat on your back; you snore too loudly!” The husband won’t know which of those things is true, but he’ll know one of them probably came from his wife. Then it’s his job to try to take what advice he can and change things as he sees fit.
Now, due to the nature of their profession, the nuku has a lot of power, and must exercise caution and skill. So as not to be too obvious, the skilled nuku will often drop by with advice that wasn’t given by one or the other spouse. The best nuku will know both spouses well, and so will be able to figure out what advice makes sense for each one—and will also be able to dole it out efficiently over time so as to be able to couch all the real complaints in with the other advice. And, provided everything works out well, the nuku will eventually stop coming around often, and, finally, will simply be a friend of the family.
Of course, on account of the delicacy of their position, it’s pretty easy to be a bad nuku. The bad nuku won’t be able to disguise the true advice very well, which can lead to arguments or hurt feelings. But worse than that is the nuku who comes around too often (and at highly inconvenient times), and doesn’t know when to stop coming around (usually somewhere around year two, or after the first child has lived a full year). Then the nuku becomes a nuisance that the couple wishes to be rid of. Such a nuku is sometimes referred to (behind closed doors) as a paopu (“worm”), on account of the similarities between its iku and the iku for nuku.
Of course, the similarity between the two iku is entirely accidental. The iku for paopu is actually a combination of the iku for pa, o and pu (though it’s hard to tell at this stage). The iku for nuku is quite different.
In examining today’s iku, first take a look at the iku for ho, which is used to mean “man”. Keep that image in mind. That shape is the general shape used for a person (seen also in the iku for ei, “I”, and kupi, “sit”, among others). The iku for nuku actually has those shapes mirrored, facing each other. So rather than being built off pa, the triangle shape is an accident of the combination. The line in between the two essentially represents the nuku: the thing that’s in between the married couple.
And, of course, Keli has always served well in her role. We’re looking to keep her around for quite a while. 
Lu’a
February 23, 2012 — David J. Peterson
lu’a
- (v.) to chant
- (n.) chanting
- (adj.) chanted
He lu’a ue ie eili kau.
“Let us chant the sun down.”
Notes: Today’s iku is a bit odd. Using the Kamakawi “head” glyph base, the syllabic glyph for ha is used as the mouth. This both gives a clue as to the pronunciation of the glyph, and also serves as a kind of evocative reminder of what the word means (the chant being a river that comes from the mouth).
On the Kamakawi islands, there’s an old tradition of going to the western edge of the island and chanting as the sun goes down. It’s not done every day—or even once a month—but on special occasions (weddings, births, funerals)—but even then, not all of them. Just certain ones. Someone will lead, but others can join in, with the chant leader setting the phrasal chanting patterns, and others joining in. I have a very specific idea for how this works, and could probably write about it, but that’ll have to wait for another day.
Nuku »