Divarian Grammer Rules
Nov 10, 2014 9:56:35 GMT
Post by Admin on Nov 10, 2014 9:56:35 GMT
« Thread started on: Jun 22nd, 2012, 11:56pm »
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
((comp dated 3-22-2009))
GRAMMATICAL RULES
Grammar differs drastically between familiar/intimate conversations and formal/stranger conversations. Familiar conversations properly translated would sound very simple and child-like but are simply short and to the point. Familiar conversations happen between peers, friends, family, and partners; formal conversations happen between political/caste divisions, and involves a great deal of posturing and manners. Again, properly translated the formal conversation would seem very long and involved. Protocols must be maintained. If a student uses the informal with a mentor, something deeper may be going on. Language is everything. Some caste stations have no choice in the manner of language they use. People of power and influence are expected--obligated even--to speak in the formal at all times, even with their closest and most intimate companions. It is simply a sign of great station, and the greatest of Divari are held to the highest standards.
The difference between informal and formal is readily apparent when used in terms of person-identifiers (I/me, you, them, etc). In the formal version the term "shorva," which means the People (Divari), absolutely must precede every person-identifier. This is simply because the Divari consider their communities and race sacred before even themselves. For example, the sentence "Shorva'mehr va seru" is formal because it would translate "I of the People am hungry;" the informal version would simply be "Mehr seru," or "I hunger." In this instance the word "seru" seems to change meanings (from hunger to hungry), but many parts of the Divari language are multi-purpose. Here "seru" is simply a condition-identifier, more akin to "to hunger" than simply "hunger." In most cases ideas such as "I am" are simply laughable amongst the Divari, which may annoy or discourage the novice speaker ("Of course you are. If you were not, it would not need to be mentioned, yes?")
Returning to the example sentence we will next find the main peculiarity amongst the Divari language: the linking of words in purposeful pattern. In the translated context, this linking is represented by an apostrophe (') to keep meaning as true as possible. Linking can be difficult to explain and understand, but is most easily understood simply as this: linking emphasizes meaning and highlights relation. "Shorva'mehr" is the first basic example of linking. Taken apart "shorva mehr" would confuse anyone, translating as "the People I/self." A simple link changes the context entirely. Spoken aloud, neither is wrong simply because many links are implied; the Divari are trained from birth to be adept linguists and anticipate conversation twists. There is no phonetic sound to indicate a link in the verbal form, but it is essential to the translated form. The example "shorva'mehr" can mislead the novice linguist to believe that a link indicates possession (I of the People). It does not, and it does. It highlights the union between community and individual. The speaker does not belong to the community (as property) but is an integral part of it.
Another example of linking is in the phrase "as'kha'ri," or "most beloved one." Translated, it would seem not to matter if it were scripted as "as kha ri" or it's proper form. In fact, this example shows how linking is necessary. "As" is a condition-identifier, like "seru," and a comparative in this case. The word "most" cannot stand alone because it needs a comparison attachment somewhere in the sentence. "Ri" presents a problem for the novice linguist because "one" in many languages can be used to describe an unknown individual. In Divari, one is simply a number; there are no unknown quantities--either you're Divari or you're not. In this example, "ri" is not used improperly because it is linked with a condition-identifier and an object-identifier ("kha"). If the linguist were to so choose, she could simply arrange this phrase to translate "one who is beloved most." This phrase, however is completely informal because it separates one entity from all others and raises it to a singular point. It is one of the few rare examples where a being is not part of the collective whole. To clarify, the formal version of this would be "Shorva'nuut an as'kha a'mehr," or "You of the People are most beloved to me."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
((comp dated 3-22-2009))
GRAMMATICAL RULES
Grammar differs drastically between familiar/intimate conversations and formal/stranger conversations. Familiar conversations properly translated would sound very simple and child-like but are simply short and to the point. Familiar conversations happen between peers, friends, family, and partners; formal conversations happen between political/caste divisions, and involves a great deal of posturing and manners. Again, properly translated the formal conversation would seem very long and involved. Protocols must be maintained. If a student uses the informal with a mentor, something deeper may be going on. Language is everything. Some caste stations have no choice in the manner of language they use. People of power and influence are expected--obligated even--to speak in the formal at all times, even with their closest and most intimate companions. It is simply a sign of great station, and the greatest of Divari are held to the highest standards.
The difference between informal and formal is readily apparent when used in terms of person-identifiers (I/me, you, them, etc). In the formal version the term "shorva," which means the People (Divari), absolutely must precede every person-identifier. This is simply because the Divari consider their communities and race sacred before even themselves. For example, the sentence "Shorva'mehr va seru" is formal because it would translate "I of the People am hungry;" the informal version would simply be "Mehr seru," or "I hunger." In this instance the word "seru" seems to change meanings (from hunger to hungry), but many parts of the Divari language are multi-purpose. Here "seru" is simply a condition-identifier, more akin to "to hunger" than simply "hunger." In most cases ideas such as "I am" are simply laughable amongst the Divari, which may annoy or discourage the novice speaker ("Of course you are. If you were not, it would not need to be mentioned, yes?")
Returning to the example sentence we will next find the main peculiarity amongst the Divari language: the linking of words in purposeful pattern. In the translated context, this linking is represented by an apostrophe (') to keep meaning as true as possible. Linking can be difficult to explain and understand, but is most easily understood simply as this: linking emphasizes meaning and highlights relation. "Shorva'mehr" is the first basic example of linking. Taken apart "shorva mehr" would confuse anyone, translating as "the People I/self." A simple link changes the context entirely. Spoken aloud, neither is wrong simply because many links are implied; the Divari are trained from birth to be adept linguists and anticipate conversation twists. There is no phonetic sound to indicate a link in the verbal form, but it is essential to the translated form. The example "shorva'mehr" can mislead the novice linguist to believe that a link indicates possession (I of the People). It does not, and it does. It highlights the union between community and individual. The speaker does not belong to the community (as property) but is an integral part of it.
Another example of linking is in the phrase "as'kha'ri," or "most beloved one." Translated, it would seem not to matter if it were scripted as "as kha ri" or it's proper form. In fact, this example shows how linking is necessary. "As" is a condition-identifier, like "seru," and a comparative in this case. The word "most" cannot stand alone because it needs a comparison attachment somewhere in the sentence. "Ri" presents a problem for the novice linguist because "one" in many languages can be used to describe an unknown individual. In Divari, one is simply a number; there are no unknown quantities--either you're Divari or you're not. In this example, "ri" is not used improperly because it is linked with a condition-identifier and an object-identifier ("kha"). If the linguist were to so choose, she could simply arrange this phrase to translate "one who is beloved most." This phrase, however is completely informal because it separates one entity from all others and raises it to a singular point. It is one of the few rare examples where a being is not part of the collective whole. To clarify, the formal version of this would be "Shorva'nuut an as'kha a'mehr," or "You of the People are most beloved to me."