Nabterayl wrote:I definitely agree that if we don't stick to the canonical wordbase when neologizing we will quickly become unintelligible. In this sense we are far more constrained than if we (or anybody, really) could simply make up a brand new word for a new concept; we're essentially limited to describing a new concept using existing words, resorting to analogy when we must. And I also agree that clearly Mando'a does this natively.
Nabterayl wrote:This built-in need for circumlocution makes me wonder, though, if we shouldn't be wary of the desire to come up with increasingly complex compound words for new concepts. The construction you suggest, Raite, seems to result in words that are more complex than any existing ones th at we have. While I grant that real Mando'ade undoubtedly have a word for "dialect" (it seems like too important a concept for such an astrographically disparate, language-centric people not to have a word for), do we need to have a single word for dialect-of-a-given-place-or-people? For instance, English gets by just fine without that ability. If I want to say "the dialect of Wiltshire, England," that takes me at least two words to say in English ("Wiltshire dialect"). "Wiltshiredialect" seems needlessly clunky.
Nabterayl wrote:With that in mind, I submit that it really isn't necessary, or even any clearer, to say something like Fett'aliitla'Mandoa as opposed to (say) Mando'a be Vhette or Mando'a be Vhett aliit. In general, Mando'a seems to be fairly comfortable with using about as many words as English (minus copulas and articles), so if in English we would say "he speaks three Mando'a dialects" I don't think we have any particular need to make "Mando'a dialects" one word in Mando'a.
As for the word you propose for dialect, I'm a little uncomfortable with the only having a suffix for a noun. If the word for "dialect" itself requires a stem to modify, how would we say things like, "I speak three dialects?" Ni jorhaa' ehn -la'miit'e doesn't seem like good grammar to me.
Nabterayl wrote:In thinking about how Mando'ade might conceive of a dialect, it occurs to me that in some ways they might deprecate the concept. For instance, it's entirely possible for two Mando'ade to have two different sets of vocal apparatus, two different sets of aural and language processing apparatus, two different mother tongues that bear no linguistic relation to one another, and have spent their entire lives hundreds of light-years apart from one another. They almost certainly sound very different from one another, even when speaking Mando'a. But in an important sense, the relevant fact is that they both speak Mando'a. No matter what throat it comes from or what ear it passes through, it's still Mando'a; it still binds them together as cultural brothers.
This leads me to suggest, as a neologism for dialect, kaabe'taap - the sounds of a place, with an alternative meaning as the distinctive soundscape of a place in general. Maybe that's all dialect really is to Mando'ade - a distinctive soundscape (undoubtedly to be celebrated, at least in theory). I suggest tying the word to place rather than a culture or clan because in my experience, real-world dialect is tied to place. If your clan spends most of its time in astrographically disparate locations (as it well might), it seems to me it actually isn't very likely to have a single clan dialect.
In this construction, we would render "He speaks three Mando'a dialects" as Kaysh jorhaa' ehn Mando kaabe'taape (Mando, I believe, is already in adjective form).
Raeth wrote:I am actually suggesting that we purposefully don't stick to the canonical list of Mando'a words. I do not have any problem with people who want to learn/use purely canonical Mando'a. However, I would like to see a 'living' Mando'a language, and that will require a greater lexicon that is currently provided by canon sources. There is another discussion thread about what new words we agree to add or not. This is half a discussion of the theoretical applications of dialect to Mando'a (think of the language spoken by Concordant Dawn - very similar to Mando'yaim Mando'a but not the same; or, in the real world, think of the differences between Russian and Ukranian), and half a discussion of how those who are so inclined would like to distinguish differing non-canon dialects of Mando'a so that we can avoid being unintelligible even if we are being slightly 'heretical'.
Raeth wrote:That said, both German and Japanese are languages that vacillate between long and short compound words. From what I have studied and experienced, these compound words created to express new concepts first start as long monstrosities cobbled together from available words. As time goes on, there seems to be a natural process of contraction wherein common usage and familiarity abbreviates and distills the original compound down to its most basic and necessary components until - voila! - you have a wholly new, short and efficient word whose etymology can trace back to a larger compound.
Raeth wrote:Some concepts or ideas cannot be transmitted simply or with a single word only. As to what you were saying about "Wiltshiredialect", imagine two communities that both speak 'English', but who have their own unique words and perhaps even their own unique grammars. Perhaps 90% of the English they use is the same, but 10% is unique to each community. Let us call these two communities, for sake of argument, Scotland and Kentucky. While it may seem unnatural (to us!) to say, "He speaks with a Scottish dialect." Or, "She speaks with a Kentucky dialect." But, we would think nothing of saying, "He speaks in a Scottish brogue." Or, "She speaks with a Southern patois." We wouldn't say, "He speaks Scottish." Scottish is its own language, and we are trying to specifically denote a dialect of English. Sometimes things just take explaining.
Raeth wrote:So, to say (in context), "He speaks the Clan ORG dialect of Mando'a." may seem a bit long, but it makes a terrible lot more sense (to me, at least) than saying, "He speaks ORG." Also, this would be one of those things that would not be said in frequent conversation. It is, by its nature, an analytical categorization for clarity. So, whatever is decided upon to label non-canonical dialects of Mando'a is going to be a little clunky by nature.
Raeth wrote:Perhaps you should take a second look at my OP. ~la'mitt'e is not what I listed as 'dialect', and is only attached to a language to mean 'a dialect of ~'. 'Dialect' as a discrete noun was suggested as such:
aliityc'miit'e - dialect [n], (lit., clan words)
So, "I speak three dialects." would not be "Ni jorhaa' ehn -la'miit'e." Rather, it would be, "Ni jorhaai ehn aliityc'miit'e."
Raeth wrote:I am ready for rebuttal, ner vod, even if it is a gauntlet to the head. Heh heh. At least we are having a lively debate! Oya!
Vlet Hansen wrote:Remember, few people spoke only Mando'a, so it's actually very likely dialects would have sprung up based on family.
Vlet Hansen wrote:Mando'a is an internal language, basically one giant shibboleth. You'd likely spend most of your time talking with people you knew well. Family and other Mandalorians from the community in the immediate "area", be that area physical or informational, would be who you dealt with the most.
Think about the Skirata clan, when they were speaking Mando'a it was nearly exclusively with their family. They interacted with some people from town on Mandalore as well, but it was more limited.
Raeth wrote:Mando'ade culture is, at its heart, clan based. Your clan is more important than your ethnicity/species, it is more important than your nationality, and it is vastly more important than your immediate place of residence. While I would say that Mando'ade are loyal to each other versus all aruetiise, within Mando'ade culture one's clan - regardless of physical proximity - trumps all other associations save for loyalty to the Mand'alor, and sometimes it even trumps that!
Raeth wrote:Which seems more likely:
1) This is the Mando'a spoken by the people from the northern hemisphere of Mando'yaim.
2) This is the Mando'a spoken by Clan Skirata.
I would hazard the guess that the latter is a more likely statement than the former.
Vlet Hansen wrote:We had a good conversation...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest