What Is a Conjugated Verb? - YOURDICTIONARY

conjugated verbs agree with their subjects

conjugated verbs agree with their subjects - win

First draft of a Lezgian/Georgian inspired lang (tentative name Awur)

I wanted to show what I have so far for a lang without a name yet (Awur for now) that borrows heavily from Georgian grammar while trying to imitate the sound and aesthetic of Lezgian.
The phonetic inventory is therefore... rather... large:
Labial Alveolar Palatal/Palato-Alveolar Velar Uvular Pharyngeal Glottal
Nasals m n
Stops p pʰ p' b t tʰ t' tʷ tʷʰ tʷ' d k kʰ k' kʷ kʷʰ kʷ' g gʷ q qʰ q' qʷ qʷʰ qʷ' ʔ
Affricates t͡s t͡sʰ t͡s' t͡sʷ t͡sʷʰ t͡sʷ' d͡z t͡ʃ t͡ʃʰ t͡ʃ' t͡ʃʷ t͡ʃʷʰ t͡ʃʷ' d͡ʒ
Fricatives f s sʷ z zʷ ʃ ʃʷ ʒ ʒʷ x xʷ χ χʷ ħ h
Liquids l r
Approximants w j
Front Mid Back
High i y u
Mid ɛ
Low æ ɑ
The phonotactics have not been decided yet; I'm still trying to figure out exactly what it is Lezgian allows; currently Awur's is essentially just (C)V(r)(C).
I have only decided on 4 cases so far: absolutive (lemma), oblique, pegative, and ergative. The oblique is marked by -a (which often triggers syncope of front unrounded vowels in the stem), the pegative by -(i)n, and the ergative by -na.
In the pegative and ergative, an epenthetic "thematic vowel" emerges between the stem and the suffix; the thematic vowel is usually an echo of the vowel in the previous syllable, with two main exceptions: 1) if the final consonant in the stem is labialized and its final syllable's vowel is high, then the thematic vowel is always or /y/ depending on front/back vowel harmony and the consonant is delabialized, and 2) some ergative forms athematic/zero-grade, having no thematic vowel; the corresponding pegative forms always use /i/ as their thematic vowel.
Additionally, I have stolen a phonological alteration from Lezgian in which word-final ejective stops become voiced (with the exception of /q’/, since /ɢ/ does exist in the phonology), so e.g. *[t’ɑp’] → [t’ɑb], but the underlying /p’/ emerges in the ergative [t’ɑp’unɑ].
Combined with marking the plural with -(V)d(i), and here are some examples of inflected nouns:
ABS.SG qʷez č'al zʷe čigʷ ür faħa gišili hälq' qʰfe ekw
OBL.SG qʷsʷa č'ala zʷa čigwa üra faħa gišla hälq'ä qʰfa ekwa
PEG.SG qʷezin č'alin zʷen čigun ürün faħan gišilin hälq'än qʰfen ekun
ERG.SG qʷezna č'alna zʷna čiguna ürüna faħana gišilna hälq'änä qʰfena ekuna
ABS.PL qʷezdi č'aldi zʷed čigʷdi ürdi faħad gišildi hälq'di qʰfed ekud
OBL.PL qʷezda č'alda zʷda čigʷda ürda faħada gišilda hälq'dä qʰfeda ekuda
PEG.PL qʷezdin č'aldin zʷedin čigʷdin ürüdün faħadan gišildin hälq'ädän qʰfeden ekudin
ERG.PL qʷezedna č'aladna zʷedna čigudna ürüdna faħadna gišlidna hälq'ädnä qʰfedna ekudna
qʷez is given the tentative meaning of "water", zʷe "we", ür "god" and faħa "world"; the rest have no meaning decided as of yet.
There a number of other suffixes I want to find a meaning for, including -wa, -waj, -Vz, -za, -zawaj, etc., but haven't yet. They will most likely end up being directional cases unless I can think of something better.
I also decided that there would be a defunct genitive case marked by -r preserved only in personal pronouns:
ABS GEN
1.SG šʷe šʷer
2.SG čʷ'e čʷ'er
3.SG ewe ewer
1.PL zʷe zʷer
2.PL xʷe xʷer
3.PL kʷ'e kʷ'er
Possession by all other nouns is expressed (I think, assuming I understood it right) by what WALS called "headward-migrated dependant marking", consisting of 1) a 3rd person possessive pronoun that agrees in number with the possessor (i.e. either ewer "his/heits" or kʷ'er "their") + 2) the possessee in the absolutive + 3) the definite/demonstrative (undecided) article a if the possessor is not a proper noun + 4) the possessor in the oblique. So e.g.
kʷ'e-r at-di a zaqa-d-a "the dogs' bones" (lit. their bones the dogs; 3.PL-GEN bone-PL DEM dog-PL-OBL)
ewe-r dar Zihij-a "Zihij's house" (lit. his house to Zihij; "3.SG-GEN house Zihij-OBL)
The oblique does not merely act as the dative; along with its role in possession, it also marks the object of a preposition.
Many adjectives likewise end with -r, and were possibly derived from the genitive when it was still productive. I have not decided on a way to form comparatives, but superlative forms of both adjectives and nouns can be formed by reduplication of the last two syllables with ablaut of the echo vowel (or in the case of adjectives ending in -r, reduplication of the last syllable before -r). So e.g. qʷir "holy → qʷiqʷir "holiest"; mawħalar "king" → mawħalarħeler "the king of all kings".
The verbs are where it really gets... odd.
For morphosyntactic alignment, I decided on an ergative-absolutive alignment (no shit) with a twist; verbs are split into 4 classes: 1) transitive with ergative agent, obligatory absolutive direct patient, sometimes oblique indirect patient, 2) intransitive with absolutive agent, sometimes oblique indirect patient, 3) transitive with pegative agent, sometimes absolutive direct patient, obligatory oblique indirect patient, and 4) intransitive with oblique sole argument. That is... there are no fewer than 4 different cases that can mark the subject, depending on the verb. I like to think of it as an extension of Georgian's nom/acc for present/future, erg/nom for aorist, dat/nom for perfect, but honestly I think this might actually somehow make more sense.
Verb conjugation is more transparently Georgian though. In Georgian, verbs consist of a preverb, a stem, a thematic affix, and then the person markers. Tenses are not determined directly by tense affixes but by whether the preverb/thematic suffix/both/neither are present, although some perfect forms are formed by smooshing the past participle together with the copula.
I have mostly stolen this system wholesale, but with one major modification: there are no preverbs; instead the preverb + stem combination is replaced with the so-called "oblique stem", which typically consists of the stem with some alteration, usually ablaut. I have not yet figured out the sound changes that produced these oblique stems so I'm mostly making them up ad hoc at the moment. Thus, the tense system works as follows:
Present: present stem + thematic + person
Future: oblique stem + thematic + person
Aorist: oblique stem + person
Perfect: present stem + Vr + copula conjugated in the present
Imperfective past: oblique stem + Vr + laq'- + -an (replaces thematic suffix) + person
Imperative: present stem + person
Present participle: present stem + Vr
Past participle: oblique stem + Vr
Where V is some vowel, usually an echo of the last vowel in the stem (like the thematic vowel for nouns!). laq'- is a back-vowel harmonized variant of leq'-, the suppleted oblique stem of fa, the copula.
Additionally, -an/-n can be suffixed to derive a passive intransitive verb from a transitive one. This is, ostensibly, the same /n/ in the pegative and ergative markers, so as to imply an unspecific agent - which is what makes it passive, so e.g. ewe-n taħ-ar-a 3.SG-ERG kill-THM-3.SG "he kills" becomes ewe taħ-ar-n-a 3.SG.ABS kill-THM-ERG-3.SG "he is killed" (lit. [someone] kills him).
A couple thematic affixes decided on so far are -aw, -an, -ar and -al, plus harmonized variants like -ew/-en/-e-el... but also a zero thematic affix -∅. A couple conjugated verbs are given for the 3rd person singular, for which the person marker is -a/-e/-i:
PRES f-∅-a aqʷ-aw-a žug-ur-n-a sup'-ar-a zaz-aw-a
FUT h-el-e ħuqʷ-aw-a žuq-ur-n-a sawp'-ar-a zuħz-aw-a
AOR leq'-a ħuqʷ-a žuq-n-a sawp'-a zuħz-a
PERF f-ar-f-a aqʷ-ar-f-a žug-ur-f-a sup'-ur-f-a zaz-ar-f-a
IPFV laq'-an-a ħuqʷ-ur-laq'-an-a žuq-ur-laq'-an-a sawp'-ur-laq'-an-a zuħz-ur-laq'-an-a
IMP h-a aqʷ-a žug-n-a sup'-a zaz-a
PRES.PART f-er aqʷ-ar žug-ur sup'-ur zaz-ar
PAST.PART leq'-er ħuqʷ-ur žuq-ur sawp'-ar zuħz-ur
The first one is the copula, which is why it's so irregular, with both a past and future oblique stem via suppletion. aqʷawa is tentatively given the meaning "he dies", sup'ara "he cleans" and zazara "he runs", but no idea yet for žugurna (whatever it is, it would have to be passive; I'm tempted to say "to be locked" because I keep confusing it with Mtsqrveli žugva "to lock").
No translation I'm happy with as of yet; I want to get more stuff set in stone before committing to the work of making up enough words for a sizable translation.
submitted by Arcaeca to conlangs [link] [comments]

Jamba, the language of the Ancients (Kirby)

Hello everybody! This is the very first conlang I'm creating. It isn't completely original, but the source material is really scarce.

Background

In the Kirby lore, there was an ancient race called "The Ancients", who were the creators of various magical artifacts, which are vital for the events of many Kirby games. For many games there wasn't much information about them, until Kirby Star Allies came out back in 2018. A "language" of sorts was introduced in this game, consting of 28 words and 2 example sentences.
My goal here is expand those 28 words and 2 sentences into a full fledged language. This is kind of a proto language, since acording to the Kirby lore, it was spoken a long time ago by an ancient race.

Source Material

These are the words introduced in Kirby Star Allies and their official translation. What I have done is add a IPA transcription of my own.
​
Jamba Words Official English Translation My IPA Translation
Bonjam Greeting /bɔn.ʒam/
Janbuhbye Goodbye /ʒæn.buʔ.bje/
Jamblasted Anger /ʒæn.blæs.ted/
Juh Huh? /ʒuʔ/
Vun Very /vun/
Jamanke Thank you /ʒæ.mæn.ke/
Japologa I'm sorry /ʒæ.pɔ.lɔ.gæ/
Jonto Soon /ʒɔn.tɔ/
Jaway I forgot /ʒæ.wæj/
Majaja Again /ma.ʒæ.ʒæ/
Jes Yes /ʒes/
Janno No /ʒæn.nɔ/
Ji Me /ʒi/
Jhappy Happy /ʒæp.pij/
Jawaii Cute /ʒæ.wæ.i:/
Mafo Lie /mæ.fo/
Jif If /ʒif/
Jaitty Good Night /ʒæjt.ti/
Rigga Painful /ɾig.gæ/
Goppoko Surprise /gɔp.pɔ.kɔ/
Bastion Heart /bæs.tiɔn/
Jorrow Sad /ʒɔ.rɔw/
Konjy Crazy /kɔn.ʒij/
Mapop Hope /mæ.pɔp/
Lor Paradise /lɔɾ/
Merry Jambasmas Merry Christmas (loan)
Jamba New Year Happy New Year (loan)
Jambadetana Congratulations /ʒæm.bæ.de.tæ.næ/
And the following are the example sentences, along with their official translations:
"Zan Par..? Jaway majaja! Japologa vun."
"Zan Par...? I forgot again! I'm very sorry"
​
"Zan Par! Jif Majaja Ji Bastion Konjy... Janno."
"Zan Par! If my heart goes crazy again.. No, never mind"

Analysis of the Sentences

Now, we can note that in the first sentence the subject "I" isn't explicitly stated, so the verbs "jaway" and "japologa" can be first person singular forms. It's worth noting that "jaway" and "japologa" are translated as "I forgot" and "I'm sorry" rather than infinitives ("to forget", "to be sorry").
We can also note that the adverbs "majaja" and "vun" come right after the verb.
In the second sentence, there is no verb. The translation says "goes crazy", and the sentence only has the word "konjy", translated as "crazy" in the vocabulary list. This has led me to believe that adjectives can be used as verbs that mean "to become (adjective)".
However, there is a problem. Since "konjy" is the verb in this sentence, the adverbs should go after it, like in the first sentence. However, the adverb "majaja" goes right before it. It might be because the second sentence is only a subordinate clause preceded by "jif", and the main clause is missing since apparently the speaker decided to omit it with "janno".
Another interesting thing in the second sentence is the construction "ji bastion", translated as "my heart" even though "ji" is translated as "me" in the vocabulary list, instead of "my". Although it may be a mistake, I want to follow the source material as accurately as possible. Can object pronouns be used as possesives? Has that happened in any natural language? And if so, how come?

Syntax

After this analysis, I've concluded some thing about the syntax of the language.

Grammar

A little bit more difficult to note than the syntax is the grammar. There are many ways I can go about this.

Phonology

This is the frequency of the phonemes in Jamba. Note that these are the phonemes I've decided on based on the romanization of these Jamba words, since there is not an official pronunciation guide.
​
https://preview.redd.it/9rhe39zavf161.png?width=600&format=png&auto=webp&s=acdc0665786e19c62a001d3550a902121c48d34f
So, this would be the whole inventory for now
​
Edit: I forgot to add /e/ and /e:/ to the inventory

Thoughts?

I've been reading about conlangs and linguistics in general for a while now, but this is the very first conlanging project I've ever done. Do you have suggestions or any corrections for my analysis of the source material before I start actually developing the Jamba language?
Some specific questions:
If you read this far, thank you a lot! I'd me more than grateful for any suggestions
submitted by Valen_02 to conlangs [link] [comments]

Jājaneši-Jarjanese

Jarjanese(in Jarjanese : Jājaneši) is a constructed Romance language. All its vocabulary either directly comes from Latin or through other Romance languages. The languages it most closely resembles are probably Italian, Romanian and to a certain extent, Portuguese. Although it is a Romance languages, it has borrowed a lot of words from Slavic languages(through Romanian), from Arabic(through Spanish and Portuguese) and from Germanic languages(through French). It has also kept many archaic Latin words that have fallen out of use in most modern Romance languages. Phonologically, the language also shares a lot of similarities with Japanese, notably the presence of the sound /ɯ/ written “u” that is unusual in Romance languages.
Pronunciation:
Jarjanese pronunciation is really regular. Each letter corresponds to one sound that never changes and the language contains relatively few sentences. It is still important to make the distinction between short and long vowels, though(long vowels always bear a macron). Not to mention stress is variable and unpredictable and should therefore be studied by heart.
Here is a table showing how to pronounce each letter:
​
Aa /a/
Bb /b/
Cc /ts/
Čč / tʃ/
Dd /d/
Ee /e/
Ff /ɸ/
Gg /g/(always hard)
Hh /h/
Ii /i/
Jj /dʒ/
Kk /k/
Ll /ł/
Mm /m/
Nn /n/
Oo /o/
Pp /p/
Rr /ɾ/
Ss /s/(never as /z/)
Šš /ʃ/
Tt /t/
Uu /ɯ/
Vv /v/
Ww /w/
Xx /x/
Yy /j/
Zz /z/
Grammar:
Just like most modern Romance languages(with the notable exception of Romanian), Jarjanese doesn't have cases and only has two genders for inanimate objects. However, it shares some unique similarites with classical Latin. For example, it has kept the SOV word-order and has no articles. For example, a sentence like "I'm drinking water" will be in Jarjanese: "(yeu)awa bevo", which word for word would translate to: " (I) water drink"(notice how the subject can be and is most of the time, omitted in Jarjanese). There are some ways to guess the gender of a word but they are not 100% reliable. Generally, words that end with "u" are masculine(ex: haku=fire), words that end with "a" are feminine(ex: awa=water). There are still exceptions, though. For example, words like "problema" or "enigma" are masculine even if they end with the letter "a". Then, nouns that end with a consonant can generally be of either gender, so you simply have to learn their gender by heart. As far as the plural is concerned, masculine nouns ending in "u" replace that "u" by an "i"(for example "xacu"(cat) becomes "xaci"(cats)), feminine nouns ending in "a", replace that "a" by an "e"(for example: "tira"(country) become "tire"(countries)). As for feminine words that end with an "a", they also replace it by an "i", as in "problema"(problem) that becomes "problemi"(problems). Words that end with a consonant also add an i for plural, as you can see in "homen"(man) that becomes "homeni"(men). Finally, nouns whose ending is an i or a long vowel sound are invariable in the plural. For example, " frazā"(brother) doesn't change in the plural.
Adjectives:
Like in all Romance languages, adjectives in Jarjanese agree according to the gender and the number of the noun they refer to. They also always come before the noun they are supposed to qualify. For example, "a red car" would be "ruva maxina"(ruva means red) and not "maxina ruva". Also notice that words that end with a vowel followed by "u", behave in a quite special way in Jarjanese, because they don't change in the feminine. For example "kūturau"(cultural) would not change according to gender.Y
You'd say:
-Kūturau eventu(cultural event)
-Kūturau fista(cultural party)
There are only two exceptions: "beu"(beautiful) and "mau"(evil, bad, wrong) that respectively become "bela" and "mala" in the feminine.
Tenses:
In Jarjanese, there's no distinction between imperfect and past simple, unlike in all other Romance languages. Jarjanese just uses a tense called "past"(pasazu) instead that has the functions of the two. Jarjanese doesn't use compound tenses either. It does use the subjunctive mood, though. Verbs are also generally conjugated in all persons and are divided into three groups, depending on their endings: "are" verbs, "ire" verbs and "ere" verbs. Each group has its own pronunciation rules. The following table includes an example for each group with its conjugation in the present tense:
​
Inviziare(to learn) Dāmire(to sleep) Vivere(to live)
(yeu) invizio (yeu) dāmo (yeu) vivo
(tu) invizii (tu) dāmi (tu) vivi
(eli/ela) invizia (eli/ela) dāme (eli/ela) vive
(nai) inviziamu (nai)dāmimu (nai) vivemu
(vai) inviziači (vai)dāmiči (vai) viveči
(ili/ile) invizian (ili/ile) dāmen (ili/ile) viven
It's important to keep in mind that Jarjanese also has a lot of irregular verbs, some of them very common. Notably the auxiliary verbs "to be"(esere) and "to have"(havere). Here is the conjugation of the latter two:
​
Esere(to be) Havere(to have)
(yeu) sō (yeu) hō
(tu) sē (tu) hai
(eli/ela) e (eli/ela) hā
(nai) somu (nai) havemu
(vai) eseči (vai) haveči
(ili/ile) son (ili/ile) han
Vocabulary:
As I mentioned above, Jarjanese takes most of its vocabulary from Latin. Either directly from Latin or through an existing Romance languages. However, it contains a lot of words of Slavic, Germanic and Arabic origin that came through other Romance languages. I also said it kept a lot of Latin archaisms. Even if I said it most closely resembles Italian, Romanian and Portuguese, Jarjanese is still a unique language and mutual intelligibility with those languages would be very weak. But let's see some examples of vocabulary.
Latin Archaisms:
​
Jarjanese Word Latin Equivalent English Translation
Lowere Loqui To speak/talk
Koyizare Cogito To think
Nīu Nihil Nothing
Puvā Puer Child
Ren Res Thing
Māyu Magnus Big
Pāvu Parvus Small
Words of Slavic origin:
​
Jarjanese Word Slavic Word Romanian Equivalent English Translation
Povesti Povesti Poveste Story
Munka Monka Muncă Work
Vina Vina Vină Fault
Krastavica Краставица(Bg: krastavica) Castravete In Jarjanese "krastavica" means "watermelon", but in Bulgarian and Romanian, the word refers to a cucumber.
Zombu Zonbŭ Zâmbi The Jarjanese word means "fang", the Romanian word is the verb "to smile" and the Slavic word originally meant "tooth".
Času Časŭ Ceas Clock/watch
Words of Arabic origin
​
Jarjanese Word Arabic Word Spanish/Portuguese Equivalent English Translation
Hanbura حنبل (hanbal) Alfombra(ESP) Carpet
Bari باري(bari) Barrio(ESP) Neighborhood
Xasu الخسّة (al-khassa) Alface(PT) Lettuce
Ata حتى (hatta) hasta(ESP)/até(PT) Until
Zaiči زيت(az-zait) aceite(ESP)/azeite(PT) Oil
Example:
Here follows a little text in Jarjanese I wrote with its English translation as well as an audio sample in which I read it out loud:
https://voca.ro/1h9bgoPo7Kjg
​
Jarjanese Text English translation
Nomi meu Antoniu Petrov e. A pesare de rusu kunomi meu, toza viza mea in Jājania morai ši konošenza mea de rusu mūcu basika e. In hacu, pazā meu de Rusia vine, pāho hī vineu tawe munka eli propōseron ši koki tawe eli simpā in tira unde sou tozu anyu luke sayau de morare. Jamai de tira mea ōdiste lowere ? Bānu, ela opōku lašači-mi deskrivere, atunki. Tira in sudi de Europa e. Insura in Mediteraneu mari in ākuna pāči intā Italia, Mauta ši otā tira šamaza Asteria, ubikaza e. In veran, Jājania mūcu xarida tira e, ši komu mari ela bōda, mūce šaye havemu. Tira nasta non mūcu populaza e. Kīka 2 milioni somu. Dū oficiai linwe havemu : jājaneši ši italianu. Mayoritači de tira, komu yeu, jājaneši lowe, pāho uni 200 000 pāsone in nōdi de tira, italianu komu prima linwa lowen. Pāho ta de geografia lowere hī non sō. In realitači, hī ta povesti mea narare sō. My name is Antoniu Petrov. Despite my Russian surname, I’ve lived in Jarjania my whole life and my knowledge of Russian is very basic. In fact, my father is from Russia, but he came here because he was offered a job and also because he had always dreamed of living in a country where the sun shines all year long. You’ve never heard of my country? Well, let me describe it a bit, then. It is a southern European country. An island located in the Mediterranean Sea, somewhere between Italy and Malta and another country named Asteria. Jarjania is a very hot country in the summer and since it borders the sea, we have a lot of beaches. Our country is not very populated. There are about two million of us. We have two official languages: Jarjanese and Italian. The majority of the population speaks Jarjanese, like me, but some 200 000 people in the North of the country speak Italian as their first language. But I’m not here to talk about geography. You’ll learn more about my country and its culture as you read me. In reality, I’m here to tell you my story.
submitted by Ice-Kagen to conlangs [link] [comments]

[Spoilers] [LONG] I tried translating the Latin lyrics again, and this is what I got.

If you have not played far enough to hear the soundtrack with Latin lyrics, there are spoilers below.
The two songs from the secret final battle contain very Latin-sounding lyrics. I am of course talking about talking about The One They Call the Witch and Daughter of the Dark God
There have been numerous attempts to transcribe and translate them, with varying degrees of success. It's also been said that they might be "faux-latin" but I am not able to find the original source for this. Regardless, there still definitely seems to be some structure there, along with individual words that certainly match the overall theme.
The original thread was closed a year or two ago, so let's try again.
Warning: the following is probably like, 80% wrong.

Isolating the Vocals

Both tracks contain two sets of lyrics - a chorus and a solo. The chorus is quite hard to make out, so I defer to the original thread for transcription and translation. But the solo singer is easier - the way the song is mixed, the solo part is on the center channel while the instruments are mostly asymmetric. So, we can use something like GoldWave to subtract out the instruments and keep mostly the vocals. To do this, I am using Goldwave 5. Load up the track, then go to Effect -> Stereo -> Stereo Center. From there, click on Presets and select "Keep Vocals". Then, under Center Channel change "From Hz" to 300.0, and set FFT size to 14, Overlap to 16x, and Click OK. Let it do its thing for a second. Then fast-forward to 00:50 and click PLAY. It's not perfect, but it makes the solo vocal part stand out very significantly.
An alternative way to clean up the vocals is to first reduce the volume by 60%, then run Effect -> Stereo -> Channel Mixer and run "Double Vocals". Do this twice. This gets you dramatically filtering but also less distortion, as this does not involve an FFT. Then maybe follow it with Stereo Center, preset to "Keep Vocals" with a "From Hz" setting of 150Hz. This will reduce some of the precussion, without distorting the low end on the vocals too much.

Transcribing

With the solo vocal part more-or-less isolated, we can try to do an initial transcription. This prioritizes pronunciation over trying to use real words or making them fit together. If I had to sing it, this is how I would do it. Word breaks are largely arbitrary; matching the transcription to real words is best-effort.
The One They Call the Witch:
nos te vedes labilliae nostre seda deoridis e revirnst a cis perlos orbiti conteri dota se cordis morte vos te vedi nos veni es reverte deorinis e core vestes forte valos oro cosis per portis nous voredi vedes nos vorati vontus nos vorenos porte cis
Daughter of the Dark God:
ei de stelpa lapenist tre dies el par illi peste alia camur peli talia orbitis te qui allisano tes cordis sera cotse vedis labeli notre sida deorinis e cor e vestis forte valos oro cosis per te ei de vilna re qui tu ni e de vitra villis nati e te verna vedis navi il suasil que tira nous voredi vedi nos voreni vertos es torinas verta
There is a fair amount of ambiguity here. Sometimes it's hard to tell between e/i and n/d/t/l sometimes. The background audio isn't helping. But, this is probably the best I'll be able to get; the translation will hopefully resolve some of the consonant ambiguities.
​

Translating

Credit goes to u/thyrandomninja and u/Kurosuzaku for doing a lot of the initial legwork. With the lyrics better isolated, I agree with some of the earlier transcription/translation, but in some places I substitute my own, because some things clearly sound different in the isolated version. Despite the audio processing this is probably something like 80% wrong; in some places you really gotta force the pieces to fit, which makes me way less confident about some parts. A big problem throughout is finding the boundaries between words. Did I mention I don't actually *know* any Latin?
For translation, I've been looking at three major sources:
​
Anyway, this is what I end up with:
The One They Call the Witch
Line number Time Transcription (proposed) Interpretation
1 0:50 nos te vetes labillae (alt: vedis?) We forbid you to slip [perish/be dishonored] (alt: we saw you dishonored?)
2 0:55 nos te se da deo retis (alt: nostri sita deo ritis) We give you the return of god (alt: our god is located thereon / our god is there)
3 1:01 ei revirenst a cis perlos orbiti He revives from [this side of] the burning world
4 1:06 conteri dota se cordis morte exhaust the endowment of my heart of death
5 1:12 vos que vedi nos veni See you that we have come
6 1:17 es reverte deorunis (alt: deo rinis) You are returned uninjured (alt: you return to god)
7 1:23 e cor et vestis forte vales For heart and armor to prevail,
8 1:28 oro cosis per portis (consis?) I pray to acquire from the gate
9 1:45 nous vereni vetes (alt: nous voreni ventis ?) We are an obstacle to youth (alt: winds pushed us?)
10 1:48 nos vorati ventus (alt: nos voreni ventus) We swallowed the wind (alt: we pushed the wind)
11 1:50 nos verenos porte cis (alt: vorenos) Indeed, we are on this side of the gate (alt: We pushed [on this side of] the gate)
​
Then we move on to Daughter of the Dark God. This is much more difficult for me to make out, save for a few words here and there. We also notice that some of the lines from the previous track are re-used, and in some places a few of the words are altered.
Daughter of the Dark God
Line number Time Transcription (proposed) Interpretation
12 0:21 id est ea(?) par lape dis That is she(?) of [for?] the dark god
13 0:25 tri dies ii par illi peste three days pass for the plague (the plague lasts three days?)
14 0:31 alia camur pellit alia orbitis (alt: canur) (alt: pelli talia) the other horned one banished [to the] other world (alt: other dogs banished to another world) (alt: other horned one banished to such a world)
15 0:37 te qui ale sano tis cordis sera You who cured your slow heart (??)
16 0:43 quot se vetes labili How many [times did] you not let yourself slip (dishonored?) (?)
17 0:47 e notre se da deorunis (alt: notre sida deo ritis; see above) We will give him uninjured (alt: our god is located thereon)
18 0:53 e cor et vestis forte vales For [of] heart and armor to prevail,
19 0:59 oro cosis per te I pray to acquire through you
20 1:26 Vidi vilna(?) ve qui tu ni (alt: ??? re qui tu ni) See ??? how force you are not (alt: ??? thing that you are not)
21 1:32 il devitra velis nati (alt: vidi vitra vilis nati) He wants to stray [depart?] children (alt: see worthless old glass?)
22 1:38 e te vernare dis nati (alt: ei te verna veris nati?) and your offspring (?) of god arise (alt: and you are the true child of spring???)
23 1:43 E suas il? que tera (??) urge (??) and earth (his own ??? and earth)?
24 1:59 nous vorati velis We strive to devour (alt: [You] strive to devour us)
25 2:02 nos voreni vertos We turned the wind (?)
26 2:05 is torinos vetato (?) (alt: is stori nos vetaro) We overthrow its swelling??? (alt: he forbids us to rest?)
​

Line-by-line translation notes

  1. We're off to a rocky start. It is possible that "lav illi" (or "lav illae", as it more clearly sounds like) is one word, or two words split differently. I can't find "lav" in a standalone dictionary, but Google translates it to "lay". As in like, lay down / defeat? Alternative possibilities are lavillae ("lava, diminutive") or maybe lavi + illae ("wash" + "that / those") but that doesn't seem to make sense. An alternative could be labillae ("disaster / dishonor / landslip / fault") and this seems the most plausible and despite the -ill- suffix (diminutive) seeming out of place, we'll go with it. Google's Latin language model is of very limited help - for instance, "vos te vede" translates to "You will phpBB", which is clearly wrong. (Yes, I know the Romans had relatively "advanced" technology, but *damn*...). I could also see vides ("look / see / seem") being vetes ("forbid / reject / prevent") but vides makes more sense? I am not sure if "vetes" is supposed to agree with "nos" or with "te" (probably nos?) but I'm out of ideas.
  2. This one is surprisingly messy. "Nostri" (we) could be "nos te" (we you); "seda" (calm, restrain [verb]) could be "se da" (-selves give), or sita ("positioned / situated / centered upon"). And "deoritis" could be a combination of many things: * deo + redis - "god" + "return" [verb] * deo + ridis / rinis - "god" + "thing / event / cause" * deo + runas - "god" + "dart" * deorines - drain / swallow down * deorunis - "uninjured". Prior transcriptions suggest this, but I do not hear the "u" sound, nor do I know where Google got the definition from. Putting it all together, "nostri seda deo redis" seems tempting, because it would mean "our restrained god returns" or something. But, "seda" is a verb, and I am not sure if there is a noun equivalent that sounds similar. Another possibility is "nostri se da deo redis" - "we give/devote/surrender ourselves to god return". The word da means a lot of things, and the conjugation is important, too. Apparently, "da" is the 2nd person singlar form of "do/dare/dedi/datus", and "nos" (we) would be the 1st person plural, so that doesn't seem to fit? So we can try "nos te se da deo redis", or roughly "we selves give [to] you return [of] god"? This too seems a bit ambiguous, but at least "da" now agrees (??) with "te", both being 2nd person singular? Maybe the 2nd person singular subject is implied, like "[You] give us "? Latin has flexible word order, but it "tends to" follow subject-object-verb (ie, "we saw him" -> "we him saw"), so "nos te [se] da" seems consistent with this, with the inflected "te" in the middle and the verb at the end? I am not sure how much it makes sense to have "se" where it is, but deep gramatical knowledge is really really beyond me here. A linguist I am not.
  3. I am not sure if "revirnst" is even a word (or if here's even a "t" at the end). Possibilities include some inflection of revires ("re-" and "strength/powemight/violence"), or revierns ("re-" + "lively or vigorous"; maybe "reinvigorated / revived"). I considered "revierns ta" vs "revienst a" but "ta" isn't a word? On the other hand, I am pretty confident in "a cis perlos orbiti". Cis (is pronounced with a "ch") refers to "*this* side of something" (as opposed to "the *other* side"). For "perlos orbiti", Google (and prior translations) give us "burning world". I believe "a" is a preposition meaning "from" and such. So, "revive from the [near side of] the burning world?" Not sure what the "e" is doing there; it could be "ei" as an exclamation, or as a pronoun ("of")? Google sometimes just ignores this. It is also possible that the first word here is "e", which acts as a pronoun and maybe joins this with the next line. So maybe the combined meaning would be something like "[of] the return from the burning world [is] what exhausts the endowment of my heart of death". But that's a lot of assumptions...
  4. The first part is really hard to make out here. The transcription of conteri dota ("waste / exhaust", "endow") is probably wrong. There might be another consonant in there somewhere, but I can't put my finger on it. I originally thought this might be quampridem but that seems like a stretch too (Whitaker actually breaks this into two words). I could also see the end being "sui / se", or "mortis / morte", or something else entirely. Google and a more generic Latin dictionary give vastly different meanings here.
  5. I was inclined to go with "vos te vedi", but it looks like "vos" and "te" are two different forms of "you" - the first being the plural (or polite) form, and the second being the singular (or casual) form. French / Spanish / Russian (and others) have something similar. So for "vos" to be the subject and "te" to be the object just doesn't seem to make sense? So, going with "que", which sounds equally possible. Google gives us the translation here.
  6. There's that word again, "deorunis". The "n" in this line is more pronounced. Google's pronunciation pronounces it a bit differently, but it sure fits nicely this time around. I'll just go with the Google Translate version here, but see point #2.
  7. Another line with lots of ambiguity and possibilities. This is the best I can come up with, though that's not saying much. I am least sure of vestis, though I suppose "vestis forti" could mean "strong clothes" or I suppose "armor". Then, vales could be an inflected form of "valeo", which is a verb meaning to "be strong / powerful / successful; to prevail". Especially given the line that follows, it would make sense for her to ask of such things from the gate, even though the combination of manual translation and Google makes this come off a bit wonky. I suppose vales could be valos ("stake / pole / point"; maybe "spear" / polearm?) but vales makes more sense because it's a verb, and Latin *prefers* Subject-Object-Verb structure (though this is by no means guaranteed). Similarly, forti ("strong") could be forte ("fortunate") or, more likely "forte" could actually be an inflected form of "forti", in context. If I had an intuition for how these inflected forms work, this would be far easier...
  8. This one seems straightforward. The line is repeated in the second track, but changed to "oro corsis per te" ("I pray to acquire through you"). Both seem to fit.
  9. Lots of ways to transcribe this one, which changes the meaning quite a bit. Google (and prior translations) tell us "voreni" = "pushed", and attempts have translated this line as "we pushed the wind".Other candidates for the second word could be: * vorati ("swallow / devour") * vereni ("spring-time of life") * veredi ("horse / hunter") * vereti ("ver + eti", "advance" + "spring" ???). And the third word could be: * petis ("to attack") * ventis ("wind") * vetes ("to forbid") ... so "nous vereni vedes" would get us to "we forbid/reject/prevent the spring-time of life")? That... actually seems plausible, except if "vetes" is a verb, it is the 2nd-person singular form of "veto", which doesn't fit with "nos" (and it is also the subjunctive mood, as in wishful thinking or imagining, but that might be okay). Unless again, the 2nd person pronoun can be implied? Some languages allow this, but what about Latin? I could see "voreni" or "veredi", depending on which filter settings I use. I could also see "petis" ("to attack") being thematically relevant, but like "vetes", this is the 2nd person singular form ("you [singular] attack") and doesn't fit with "nos" ("we").The other strange thing is the first word sounds like "nous" rather than "nos". Google translates this as "us" rather than "we" (an inflected form?). So maybe the verb really *is* a 2nd person singluar verb, and "tu" (subject) is omitted/implied, and "nous" is the object? But I do not see "nous" on the list of pronouns, so ..... ? I am completely out of ideas for this line (and largely the one that follows). I'm just going to go with one, even if I don't like any of them.
  10. Prior transcriptions give this as "nos voreni vontos" and Google seems to think "vontos" is a word, but I can't find it in other sources. Could be anyone's guess. The closest thing I can find is an inflection of fantum ("temple") but that clearly sounds like it starts with a 'v', right? I must defer to earlier transcriptions / translations for this one. On the other hand, if we go with vorati ventus ("devour"), ("wind"), we actually get somthing plausible. OLD gives a possible definition for vorati as "perfect participle masculine plural", which *maybe* might be the "we" form of "voror", but linguistics is not my strong point. I guess "perfect" would mean like, "we [fully] devoured the wind" but I am probably grasping at straws again.
  11. There's "portis" ("[of] gate") again, so we're hopefully on the right track. Earlier transcriptions use "nos vorenos" ("we pushed") but I am still not sure where Google is getting "vorenos" from. I can't find this in OLD or in Whitaker. An alternative could be verenos maybe, and at least that's more of a word? Plugging "nos verenos porte cis" into Google Translate actually gives us something reasonable, but I am a little disinclined to drop the previous translation quite yet. So, take your pick. Google helpfully gives us "are" in this translation; I know in some languages the present-tense form of "to be" ("am/are") can be omitted. If nothing else, their language model is hopefully recognizing this properly.
  12. Another line where there is much difficulty isolating the words. Somewhat arbitrarily, that is what we come up with. We start with "id est" ("he / that" + "is") but it could involve dies ("day, time, age") instead. The next thing I cannot make out, but the pronoun ea (nominative she) seems like as good a guess as any. Then par ("equivalent", in this case, "for??") could make sense. I suppose labe ("disaster, landslip, dishonor, blemish, stain, fault") could also be lape ("stone"). Both are nouns. I kind of like "labe" better because we (think?) we saw labillae earlier. Come to think of it, "labe" could mean "dark" in this context, which seems to fit? If this is right, the only thing I can think of for the ending is dis, meaning "[to/of] god". I thought I heard an "n" and a "t" at the end, but I can't find ways to make them fit. We'll just go with it.
  13. Can't make out the first part. I think "ille" is an inflected form of a third-person pronoun, meaning "he" or "that one". I think "peste" means "plague" or "disease" or some such. At least it seems somewhat thematically appropriate. I am least certain of ii ("pass [time]") here.
  14. This one could go so many different ways; I am 99% sure this is wrong. Here, "orbitis" is an inflected form of "orbiti" ("world"), meaning that "world" is an object of some action. And if "alia" is right, it might be talking about [something being done to] the "other world", which could be a stretch but at least it fits thematically. There is ambiguity between camur ("curved / having such horns") / canur (something about dogs) / canor ("song") and alia ("other") and talia ("such"). Or it could be "eli talia". I don't know where Google found "canur" - I can't find it anywhere else.
  15. This could be "allisero" ("to crush / bruise") or it could be "ali sano", which would mean "to nourish / cure / heal". I can't make out which one it is.
  16. We start to see repetition of the first track, except it changes from "nos te" to "vos se", meaning (I think) it goes from "we [did something to] you" to "you [plural] [did something to] yourself". The next word seems to be a form of "vidi / vide", meaning "to see". So, this line parallels the first track but goes from "we saw you" to "you saw yourself". I can't make out what follows, but "ille / illae" seems to be a pronoun (again, assuming I'm right about word boundaries). I can't figure out what comes before it, though.
  17. It sounds like "nostri" becomes "notre", except although "notre" is a thing in French, I can't find a Latin equivalent. Maybe the "s" is hard to hear this time around?
  18. Seems to be unchanged from the previous track, but is still equally hard to make out. At least they sound consistent. I guess vales ("to be strong; to prevail") could also be valos ("stake / pole / point / [spear]")? I kind of like "vales" because it is at the end, which is a little more consistent with the generally more common S-O-V order.
  19. Here again, "per portis" changes to "per te", changing the meaning from [I pray to acquire it] "through the gate" to "through you". Seems logical.... and at the very least, it helps establish the point of view of the speaker, and in some sense, the audience.
  20. Vidi / vedi is probably "look / see / looked / saw", but I cannot figure out what comes after. The word boundaries are difficult here, as always. "Vilna" isn't a word, and neither is anything close that I can find. If we pick different work boundaries, we could break it up as "??? nate qui tu ni" ("son that you are not") but I can't come up with a reasonable candidate for the first word. Maybe "e te vel nave qui tu ni", or maybe "??? re qui tu ni" ("??? thing that you are not")? But I am still missing the first few words.
  21. Not sure if this is "vidi vitra" or if there is a pronoun + "devitra". Pretty sure "vitra" means "glass" of some sort, and the "vedi" before it means "look / see". But I cannot make out what comes after. Whitaker parses devitra as a single word (root+suffix), meaning "instrument / means / place [of] detour / stray / depart". But I can't find references to this anywhere else; WORDS uses a root/suffix approach to potentially parse "words" that weren't ever actually used. It is very likely wrong, but I'll go with it...
  22. I think "e te" means "of your", and then we have verna, which is an inflected form of several possible words, from "slave", to "spring", to "revive, awaken, flourish". I guess the exact source word depends on the context, and what agrees with what we already have. But it may as well mean "your slaves see a ship". I suppose vernare could fit, but it could also be verna + re ("thing). I am guessing the rest is dis + nati, which fits the title of the song at least (and it helps that the verb is at the end). Another possibility is veris ("true, real, genuine, actual").
  23. I am out of ideas here. suas could mean "to sew", or it could be a pronoun ("his/her own"), or it could be suasi ("to warn / foretell"). Furthermore, "tera" or "terra" sounds more like "kira" or "qui ra". Both are nonsense? The rest is anyone's guess.
  24. This may as well mean "we eat curtain". Running out of ideas on the whole "voreni" thing. Possible candidates are "varati" (related to "bend/curve"), veredi ("horse / hunter"), "veriti" ("to revere / respect"), "vorati" ("to swallow / devour"), "viridi" ("green / grass"). Your guess is as good as mine.
  25. I am not sure that "voreni" is a word. I am not sure where Google is even getting parts of it from. The closest single thing I can find is "vorati", meaning "to swallow / devour [completely]". Appropriately ominous, I guess?
  26. I originally left this one largely to Google, and originally it translated "es tor inas verta" into "You laid aside for this purpose". I guess es could mean "to be" or "to eat/destroy", which is relevant but I gotta make the rest of it fit. Using different letter grouping and an alternative source, I think what I have now makes slightly more sense. Still, it's probably wrong. The last syllable is particularly hard to make out.
​

Overall notes

Latin is a highly inflected language, meaning that words can take on many forms, depending on context. English has a little bit of inflection with words like "he / him" or "who / whom", depending on what role the pronoun plays in context. Well, in Latin, it's not just the pronouns changing forms, but *nouns* and adjectives too. And they could have something like 5-6 different forms, which have to agree, and change depending on what kind of action is being performed on an object. There are also two forms of "you", kind of like in French. It's a bit hard to explain in English, but this sort of thing happens in many other languages, like Spanish, Russian, etc. Hungarian cranks the level inflection up to eleven. On the other hand, Chinese has virtually none of it.
Because of the inflections, the word order in a sentence can be flexible - that is, you can say the words in any order, and the subject and object become obvious from the endings. That said, Latin "generally" follows a Subject-Object-Verb order (whereas English uses Subject-Verb-Object).
In order for the translation to make sense, the noun/adjective inflections have to agree with the verbs, tenses, and forms involved. But, since I don't know any *actual* Latin, I cannot intuitively tell if they line up. We can look this stuff up, cross-check it, and (likely need to) alter the transcription, but I am out of ideas for tonight.
I've largely ignored verb mood, tense, and to some extent, person, in my "translation" (ie, verb variations like see / seen / saw / had seen / would have seen, etc) so in some places the meaning could be off because of this. I'd be down to do a grammar cleanup pass, but I'm not sure the transcription is accurate enough to warrant it. So it would be nice to hear from others first.

Final thoughts

I am seriously hoping that someone with an *actual* knowledge of Latin will come along, and put my "translation" completely to shame, tell me all the million of ways I'm wrong, and provide a corrected version. But then at least we'll know what it means.
​
If you've managed to read all the way to the bottom, I am truly impressed.
EDIT: minor formatting fixes; realized "re" = "thing" and updated accordingly
submitted by evil-wombat to octopathtraveler [link] [comments]

The Early Process of Niertian, and you can help developing it

Niertian is a Maugri-related constructed naturalistic language spoken by speakers who wanted a lingua franca as logical as possible. Maugri has become more and more an engined international auxiliary language over the decades. Niertian is spoken as the mother tongue of people from the East. Niertian is supposed to be a somewhat logical, inflected-agglutinating language with a few exceptions. The Niertian language project was started on December 26th, 2020 as my second conlang and already has basic structures. The Maugri language project was started back in March 2018 as my first conlang. Maugri and Niertian are intended to be spoken in a fictional world as well as in the real world for everyone's general use.

A Short Overview about Maugri

Maugri's ~[ˈmau̯.gʁ̞i] way of working is almost complete and Maugri have a vocabulary of 2 450 words. Maugri is a very, very flexible language and it is possible to use Maugri isolating to an very agglutinating degree. Its way of working is similar to Esperanto's and Klingon's (as of Dr. Marc Okrand) but more logical. There are some notable ideas of the way of working:
  1. Maugri is (how wondering!) phonetic, so all sounds which are not interchangeable become one character. This is why Maugri has 41 characters. Many of them uses the ipa character but some don't. Capital characters are bad, not even names have Caps.
  2. There are exactly 110 pronominal prefixes due to 10 distinctable pronouns (10² + 10) because it is set together of the subject pronouns1S: kᴐ-; 1P: vᴐ-; 1CO (We and You~All): bᴐ-2S: yᴐ-; 2P: rᴐ-3S: Ø or zᴐ-; 3S(M): hᴐ-; 3S(F): fᴐ-; 3P lᴐ-5: dᴐ-and if you use a direct object, then you just add the first character (consonant) of the directed pronoun onto the vowel, for example: 1S>2P: kᴐr-. This is the way to create a pronominal prefix. Usually, you prefixe the verb but since Maugri is a very flexible language you don't have to if you don't want to. For example, you can decide to not use the pron.prefix and use the various pronouns instead. Please don't use the 2P form for the formal second person singular, but if you insist to, it is okay but weird.
  3. Maugri has got eight cases, and you have perhaps already wondered how the cases are going to be used? Well..., you decide. If you like to use the one case rather than the other, it is still perfect, but please use them as they are thought to be used. To make a long story shortened, Maugri has got the Nominative (Ø), Accusative (sö), Genitive (tö), Dative/Benefactive (gö), Instrumental, Vocative, Partitive (bö), Stative (ρö) and the Possessive (cö). The only thing to keep in mind is, if you are using the genitive to describe an possessee, then you should use the possessive case for possession, in which case the possessive is very likely the direct object. The syllable for any case can be attached to the word (usually as a prefix) or as a standalone particle before or after an object or a syntactical argument. Adjectives don't have to agree with the noun grammatically, the grammatical structure of an argument/object can be attached to alle words of this part of the sentences or to one of their words or to the case particle.
  4. Maugri's derivational system may be the strongest Esperantish part of Maugri. You have "normal" word roots like "learn" (lärn), but teach will be learn-Causative plus an affixe to indicate that the word is a verb, like learn-Verb-Causative (lärn-u-mᴐ). But the most affixes are infixes, f.ex.: week (nupr), but when you look at the week as period of time, then we get nup-evr). As you might think, you can use the affixes on any part of speech and replace them with "normal" words and you can take the affixe as a word root and build your sentence around them. There shouldn't be any root words in Maugri which seems to be another word with affixes.
  5. Maugri has got some adverbial pronouns (tabelvortoj in Esperanto) but I have adapted it to the maugrish system and added two categories (referring-indicating and referring-questioning).
  6. The sentence structure of Maugri is totally interchangeable since Maugri has cases and word-indicating affixes, there's no final decision when exactly to use commata, but there is an affix for indirect speech and there are quotation marks and so on, plus an additional mark for numbers or number words. But you don't have to use them at all and it is still fine when you have your individual Usage and expression.
A complete sentence example in Maugri:
Maugri phrase: tokilärnevo zᴐvültitumᴐ ksömawgritoki Alternative writing form: tokilärnevo zŏvültitumŏ ḳömaųgritoki IPA for Maugri phrase: [tʰo.kʰi.lɛʁ.ˈne.vo t͡sᴐ.vyl.tʰi.ˈtʰu.mᴐ k͡sø.mäu̯.ɡʁi.ˈtʰo.kʰi] Maugri phrase in his parts: toki.lärn-ev-o zᴐ-vült-i-t-u-mᴐ ksö-mawgri.toki. Gloss: language.learn-CONT-NM(NOM) 3SG.N-fun-PRE-ACT-VB-CAUS INS-maugri.language approx. English translation; "The language-learning makes fun with/per Maugri-language."
If you like to find out more about Maugri or if you already know you want to learn Maugri, great! You can join our discord server (at the moment I write this entry it have only three more or less active people) right here: https://discord.gg/fF35zqN

Niertian, and what I intend to make

As you have already heard, Niertian ~[ˈnir.ˌtˢi̯an] is the second conlang I have made since 26.12.2020 (not too long ago in the past!) and it is in a way related to Maugri. Niertian may seem a way odd as a naturalistic conlang, perhaps because of my own favor a language would be nice to look like. At first, this is what I have already done (some changes, if you want to, are possible, but please not the intention and/or the way the language do look like):
  1. Niertian has a bunch of vowels and consonants:Here are Niertian's consonants:
Bilabial Labiodental Dental Alveolar Postalveolar Retroflex Palatal Velar Uvular Glottal
Nasals m n¹ ŋ
Trills r ʀ²
Plosives p³ b

t̪³ d̪ t³ d k³ g ʔ⁴ <->
Fricatives ɸ⁵ β⁵ f v s z ʃ ʒ ʂ⁶ ʐ⁶ ç⁷ x ʁ² h⁷
Lateral Fricatives ɬ⁸
Approximants j
Lateral Approximants l
Affricates t͡s d͡z t͡ʃ d͡ʒ t͡ʂ d͡ʐ k͡x
Others ɫ⁹ ɕ¹⁰ ʑ¹⁰ ; t͡ɕ d͡ʑ w
¹ /n/ becomes /ŋ/ before /k/, sometimes even before /g/. ² /r ʀ ʁ/ are interchangeable. ³ /p t̪ t k/ can be aspirated interchangeable. ⁴ /ʔ/ is unwritten and occurs before any vowel intervocalic and if a word starts with a vowel. ⁵ /ɸ β/ are interchangeable allophones of /f v/. ⁶ /ʂ ʐ/ are in some dialects like /ʃ ʒ/, but normally phonemic. ⁷ /h/ becomes /x/ before /a o u y/ or intervocalic and /ç/ before /e i/ or intervocalic. ⁸ /l/ becomes /ɬ/ after t, pronounced /t͡ɬ/. ⁹ /l/ becomes /ɫ/ before any vowel, occurs only at the beginning of a syllable. ¹⁰ /ɕ ʑ/, respectively /t͡ɕ d͡ʑ/ are in some dialects like /ʃ ʒ/, respectively /t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/ but normally phonemic.
And here are Niertian's vowels:
front near front central near back back
close i y ɨ u
near close ɪ ʏ ʊ
close mid e¹ ø o²
mid e̞¹ ə o̞²
open mid ɛ¹ œ ᴐ
near open æ³ ɐ⁴
open ä ɑ⁵
¹ /e e̞ ɛ/ are interchangeable allophones in the Basic Level. ² /o o̞/ are interchangeable allophones in the Basic Level. ³ /ä/ becomes /æ/ at the beginning of a syllable. ⁴ / becomes /ɐ̯/ after any vowel, however, /r ʀ ʁ/ can be used here too. ⁵ /ä/ becomes /ɑ/ before /m n/.
  1. Have a look at some syllable structures:
Basic Level First Level Second Level Third Level
a' /ä æ³ ɑ⁵/ /æ œ³ ɐ⁵/ /ɛ ɐ³ ɐ⁵/ /ə ɐ³ ə⁵/
a /ä æ³ ɑ⁵/ /ä ɛ³ ä⁵/ /ɛ ɐ³ ɐ⁵/ /ə ə³ ə⁵/
e' /e e̞ ɛ/ /e/ /œ/ /ə/
e /e e̞ ɛ/ /ɛ/ /ø/ /ə/
i' /i/ /ɪ/ /ɪ/ /ə/
i /i/ /i/ /ɪ/ /ə/
o' /o o̞/ /o̞ ø/ /œ/ /ə/
o /o o̞/ /o/ /ᴐ/ /ə/
u' /ʊ y/ /ʊ/ /ə/
u /ʊ/ /ə/
y' /ɨ/ /ʏ/ /ʏ/ /ə/
y /ɨ/ /ɨ/ /ʏ/ /ə/
The Basic Level Syllable becomes the primary syllable stress too.
Syllable Structure and Reduction, Fig. 1
​
ä means that the vowel become an overlength. /aː/á means that the vowel become a higher level in Syl.reduct. /ä/ (1st>0th)à means that the vowel become part of a diphthong /ä̯/â means that the vowel become a lower level in Syl.reduct. /ɛ/ (1st>2nd)
I'm going to IPA all examples and do ⁰¹²³ for all reduction levels: a¹fe⁰l /ʔä.ˈfɛl/ a¹fe⁰lti¹ŝ /ʔä.ˈfɛl.tiʃ/ bju⁰rn /ˈbjuɐ̯n/ bju⁰rne¹m /ˈbjuɐ̯.nɛm/ a²fe¹lbju⁰rne¹m /ʔɐ.fɛl.ˈbjuɐ̯.nɛm/ a²fe¹lbju⁰rnë¹ż /ʔɐ.fɛl.ˈbjuɐ̯.nɛːʒ/ a²fe¹lbju⁰rnti¹jë¹ż /ʔɐ.fɛl.ˈbjuɐ̯n.ti.jɛːʒ/ a²fe¹lbju⁰rne¹mo²ni²k /ʔɐ.fɛl.ˈbjuɐ̯.nɛ.mᴐ.nɪk/ va⁰lt /ˈvalt/ va⁰ltri¹n /ˈval.trin/ po³va⁰ltri¹n /pə.ˈval.trin/ po³va⁰lti¹z /pə.ˈval.tiz/ po³va⁰lẑe¹tju²tri¹ncja³ /pə.ˈval.d͡ʒɛt.jʊ.trin.t͡sjə/ po³va⁰lti¹zcja³ /pə.ˈval.tiz.t͡sjə/ a²fe¹lbju⁰rnti¹je¹me²ŝtŝna²ky³ /ʔɐ.fɛl.ˈbjuɐ̯n.ti.jɛ.møʃt.ʃnɛ.kə/ vja³tno¹va⁰lti¹zcja³ /vjət.no.ˈval.tiz.t͡sjə/
(These words do not necessarily have to be real words for the later Niertian vocabulary.)
Generally, every syllable which you can think of is possible. The heaviest thing may be something like ĉunsct. Some speaker may not speak out the c. The most closed syllable is CVC because when you add any syllable onto this, this syllable won't break out, but a syllable with only f.ex. CV is only closed, when a syllable with the same form or a more closed syllable got attached with CV.
  1. The Niertian Grammar is something unique, I made 16 cases and I have made up one of them. The most important feature is that Niertian strictly distinguishes nouns from verbs. So, there is a noun word root and a verb word root of the same root word Esperanto would have. But only a word root in Niertian isn't even really a word (prepositions are derived from noun word roots and some adverbs are derived from verb word roots). As we have already seen it above, the word roots only become real words when they get their declension or conjugation. The 16 cases of Niertian:
The Usage of Cases in Niertian, Fig. 2
To create f.ex. adjectives, you will need an affixe. Every part of an object/argument have to agree with the grammatical informations you want to add to. Pronouns are treated like nouns, but their root and declension form are partially merged.
I haven't thought too much about the verb system yet, although I already have the first ideas of a conjugation table from seven different tenses. The tenses could be: deep past, general past, general, verb / gerund, near, momentary / now, true future, possible future.
I want to create an adverbial pronoun-system like Maugri has one, but it is a mere idea by now.
I have actually avoided to create vocabulary by now because Niertian don't have a full derivational system yet and I still have to approve over 1500 words for the actual derivational system for Maugri.
Please write so much as you can for your comment! I, for example, have been writing on this for over two whole hours. I appreciate rather every constructive comment than only one sentences which says almost nothing for me.
If you like to learn Maugri, or if you want to contribute to Niertian's development, great! You can join our discord server (fairly new) right here: https://discord.gg/vXSJwK8Yh8
If you have joined one of the server, please do not wonder where I am, because I am going to sleep and check them in approx. 10 hours (03.01 10:00 UTC) again.
For example, one of my questions is if my second conlang looks naturalistic as by now, or doesn't. What do you think?
submitted by InSpaceGSA to conlangs [link] [comments]

Some people says learning english is hard. In english are there any basic grammar rules that are complicated? Examples?

Summary
Was looking for specific examples of basic grammar rules that were complicated
Or said by a user replying to a differenet user
They want to know if there are any basic, complicated rules.
Basic gramamr rules are when they always are absolutely needed for sufficient clarity when communicating
A simple test is if it doesnt belong in a year 1 / 1st grade / age 5-6 class then it's not basic
​
List of examples
I don't consider any of these examples as basic. None of them seems basic to me.
but if you think any of these examples are always are absolutely needed, please explain / let me know why?
​
I have a degree in linguistics, have taught ESOL for years and studied several languages at an introductory level. I have never seen anything that suggests to me that English is a difficult language to learn, compared to other languages.
Two grammar rules do come to mind that I think are common but also difficult/different compared to other languages.
English marks singular vs uncountable nouns:
A very common mistake with learners are mistakes like Car is more expensive than ring, correction being obviously to add a//my/that or another determiner. rule behind this is actually rather obscure and complicated: Singular countable nouns in argument position require determiners. It seems that this is done to mark out singular nouns from uncountable nouns, but in my experience, most languages don't have any such marking. My guess is that closely related European languages would.
English doesn't drop subject in finite clauses:
In most languages you could say sentences like am hungry or is raining, but not in English, you must say I am hungry or It is raining. French is only language I know that also doesn't drop subject in these clauses, I at least know that Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Russian, Thai, Vietnamese, Spanish, Portuguese, even an Inuit language I once studied... list goes on, all these languages drop subject.
I can think of one or two difficult things about pronunciation two but I'm guessing you mean syntax.
​
Verbs:
Verbs are same. Most follow predictable patterns, but then we have a variety that then completely break those rules and make up their own:
Regular verb: jump, jumps, jumped, did jump, had jumped, will jump, will be jumping
Irregular verb: sing, sings, sang, did sing, had sung, will sing, will be singing
Irregular verb: catch, catches, caught, did catch, had caught, will catch, will be catching.
All three of those use different rules to do exact same conjugation
​
James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on teacher
example refers to two students, James and John, who are required by an English test to describe a man who, in past, had suffered from a cold. John writes “ man had a cold” which teacher marks as being incorrect, while James writes correct “ man had had a cold.” Since James’ answer was right, it had had a better effect on teacher. sentence can be understood more clearly by adding punctuation and emphasis: James, while John had had “had”, had had “had had”; “had had” had had a better effect on teacher.
puncation counts as grammar rules
​
sentence Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo is grammatically correct...
​
S:
​
​
​
Here’s a poem that illustrates rules that are quickly broken:
Linguistic humor, English lesson
We'll begin with box, and plural is boxes; But plural of ox should be oxen, not oxes.
Then one fowl is goose, but two are called geese, Yet plural of moose should never be meese.
You may find a lone mouse or a nest full of mice, Yet plural of house is houses, not hice.
If plural of man is always called men, Why shouldn't plural of pan be called pen?
cow in plural may be cows or kine, But plural of vow is vows, not vine.
I speak of my foot and show you my feet, If I give you a boot, would a pair be called beet?
If one is a tooth, and a whole set are teeth, Why shouldn't plural of booth be called beeth?
If singular is this and plural is these, Why shouldn't plural of kiss be named kese?
Then one may be that, and three may be those, Yet plural of hat would never be hose;
We speak of a brother, and also of brethren, But though we say mother, we never say methren.
masculine pronouns are he, his and him, But imagine feminine she, shis, and shim!
So our English, I think, you all will agree, Is craziest language you ever did see.
I take it you already know Of tough and bough and cough and dough? Others may stumble, but not you, On hiccough, thorough, slough, and through?
Well done! And now you wish, perhaps To learn of less familiar traps?
Beware of heard, a dreadful word, That looks like beard and sounds like bird.
And dead; it's said like bed, not bead; For goodness sake, don't call it deed! Watch out for meat and great and threat; They rhyme with suite and straight and debt.
​
English grammar is insanely simple without complications.
It makes me wonder how did other nations managed to naturally develop languages with complicated grammar.
​
False friend type of things
In Dutch you can say "I'll give you tomorrow a present",
​
One grammar rule we follow but don’t really teach is order of adjectives,
order is “opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose”.
For instance, you could say “Great big old round blue Irish steel shovel” and you’d be fine, but if you said “Blue steel round big great old Irish shovel” you’d sound mad AskAmericans
​
I know that you can have a big red ball, but never a red big ball.
English adjective order is Opinion, Size, Age, Shape, Color, Origin, Material, Purpose.
​
Contractions
Subject-verb agreement
simple rule to make a plural noun is to add an s to end. But then there's literally hundreds of nouns that then break that rule or amend that rule in multiple ways.
Using auxilary do/does to form questions is unique
periods go at end of statements, unless said statement is part of a quotation
heard it repeated that aside from irregular spelling and phonology rules, it is tense system which is most complicated
​
I think a lot of learners have difficulty with articles,
especially when to use "zero article". way most verbs need "do-support" to make a question.
difference between simple present and continuous present.
Words whose intonation depends on whether they are used as verbs or nouns, e.g. project, desert, compound.
​
Stop.
​
Yeah no= no. No yeah= yes
​
​
These were not grammar rules examples:
Spelling:
Pronunciation
Contextual interpretation
redundancies.
Spelling
'i" before "e" except after "c". You mean rules like that?
​
obviously [.....] one of biggest things you need to understand about English language is how to identify a word and replicate it elsewhere.
For instance, your use of" Austrailia" proves to be quite poor grammar, as subreddit is called "Ask an Australian", and contains many instances of word "Australia". It is then, rather perplexing, that you would be incapable of spelling this word correctly, on account of how frequently it is used here.
.....
........
​
There is a reason that they don't directly teach Grammar in Australian schools any more.
They actually found that teaching grammar could lead to worse outcomes because it can be so confusing.
If this is accurate, then it makes sense why nobody in austrilia was able to answer this question or knew of any gramamr rules examples
​
​
This was my inital ask
Some people says learning english is hard. In english are there any basic, always needed, grammar rules that are complicated? Examples?
Basic grammar rules, that are always needed, and are complicated? Examples?
For Basic grammar rules (that are always needed)? I don't think there any?
A user rewrote my inital ask
with more correct grammar. Make of it what you will.
Hey Australia, some people say that learning English is hard. Are there any grammar rules that seem basic but are actually complicated? Do you have any examples?
What are some basic grammar rules that are always needed but are complicated? I can’t think of any.
​
​
Holy... smokes..
​
I guess... shouldve gone uk first with this
But this english topic is now a completed topic;
but if you think any of these examples are always are absolutely needed for sufficient clarity, and if it'd be needed to be taught to year 1 / 1st grade / age 5-6 class, then please explain / let me know why it'd be basic, and always abosutley needed?
​
Basic grammar rules are 101 level. I don't consider any of these examples as basic.
submitted by happypuppy100 to AskABrit [link] [comments]

[Lamentations chapter 3](https://esv.literalword.com/?q=Lamentations+3)

Lamentations
 
Chapter Three – Hope in [the] mercies of the Name [ה', Hah’]  
“As the speaker is called גבר [GehBehR], a man (vss. [verses] 1, 27, 35, 39), this poem must be a personal lament, not a dirge by or for the city as in chs. [chapters] 1; 2; 4. The author seems to have the experiences of Jeremiah in mind (cf. [compare with] Jer. [Jeremiah] 38:6-13) and may in fact be playing the role of Jeremiah in the poem. The order of thought is affliction, resignation, repentance, and prayer.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-1. I am the brave [who] saw affliction [עני, `oNeeY] in [the] rod [בשבט, BeShayBehT] of His crossness [עברתו, `ehBRahThO].  
“This, and other passages in this poem, have been applied to Jesus Christ’s passion: but, in my opinion, without any foundation.” (Adam Clarke, 1831, p. IV 153)  
“The words ראה עני [Rah‘aH `ahNeeY], form a relative clause with the relative particle understood, as so often in poetry.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-2. I was driven, and walked [in] dark and not light.  
“Without any light [RSV – Revised Standard Version] is incorrect, since this would require a circumstantial clause, with the negative אין [‘aYN]; translate but not into light [KJV – King James Version], if it is taken as in the adverbial accusative.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-3. But [אך, ’ahKh] in me returns, reverses his hand all the day.  
“The Hebrew idiom ישב יהפך [YahShooB YahHahPhoKh], lit. [literally], ‘he returns, he turns,’ expresses repeated action and the imperfect of the two verbs is frequentative; hence, ‘he has repeatedly turned…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-4. Wastes [בלה, BeeLaH] my flesh and my skin,
breaks my bones.
-5. Built upon me and encompassed [ויקף, VahYahQahPh]
poison [ראש, Ro’Sh] and suffering [ותלאה, OoThLah’aH].  
“The words בנה עלי [BahNaH `ahLah-eeY] mean, lit., he hath builded against me…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-6. In dark places [במחשכים, BeMahHahShKeeYM] settled me
like those dead forever.  
“This verse is a direct quotation from Ps. [Psalm] 143:3, with the order of the first two words changed to fit the acrostic scheme.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-7. Hedged [גדר, GahDahR] on my account [בעדי, Bah`ahDeeY], and I cannot go out,
weighted my bronze.  
“The words הכביד נחשתי [HeeKhBeeYD NeHahShTheeY], lit., ‘he has made my bronze heavy,’ means fetters of bronze (cf. our ‘irons’), and are used elsewhere with this meaning always in the dual.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-8. Also, when [כי, KeeY] I shout and yell [ואשוע, Ve’ahShahVay`ah],
He shut up my prayer.  
“The RSV ignores גם [GahM], also, ‘moreover,’ at the beginning of the verse. The word כי [KeeY], though, is better translated ‘whenever,’ since the verbs are in the frequentative imperfect. However שתם [SahThahM] is in the perfect; hence, ‘he has ignored’ in place of he shuts out.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 23)  
-9. He hedged my ways in hewn stone [בגזית, BeGahZeeYTh],
my paths [נתיבתי, NeTheeYBoThah-eeY] made crooked [עוה, `eeVaH].  
-10. A bear ambushing He is to me,
a lion in concealments [במסתרים, BeMeeÇThahReeYM].
-11. My ways He detoured [סורר, ÇORayR],
and He shredded me [ויפשחני, VahYePhahShHayNeeY],
put me desolate [שמם, ShoMayM].
-12. He drew [דרך, DahRahKh] his bow,
and stationed me like a target [כמטרא, KahMahTahRah’] to an arrow.  
-13. He brought in[to] my kidneys sons of his quiver [אשפתו, ’ahShPahThO].  
“The arrows of his quiver: Lit., ‘the children of is quiver,’ the arrows being thought of as the offspring of the quiver – a figure that appears also in Horace (Odes 1. 22. 3).” [I don’t see it there] (Meek, 1956, p. VI 24)  
-14. I was laughingstock [שחק, SeHoQ] to all my people,
their song [נגינתם, NeGeeYNahThahM] all the day.  
“The burden of [sic] their songs is one word in the Hebrew; better, ‘their taunt-song’… so also in vs. 63 (cf. Jer. 20:7).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 24)  
-15. Sated me [השביעני, HeeShBeeY`ahNeeY] in bitters,
irrigated me [הרוני, HeeRVahNeeY] [with] wormwood [לענה, Lah`ahNaH],
-16. and he crushed [וירגרס, VahYahRGeRayÇ] in gravel [בחצץ, BehHahTsahTs] my teeth,
trod me [הכפישני, HeeKhPeeYShahNeeY] in dust.  
“The word גרס [GahRahÇ] is found only here and in Ps, 119:20; its meaning is uncertain… (cf. Prov. [Proverbs] 20:17; Matt. [Mathew] 7:9)…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 24)  
-17. And you spurned [ותזנח, VahTheeZNahH] from peace my soul;
I forgot [נשיתי, NahSheeYTheeY] goodness.  
“The word תזנח [TheeZNahH] can be taken as second masculine Qal1 with oscillation from third to second person (see Exeg. [Exegesis] On Song of S. [Songs] 1:2, 4), as in vs. 23 (so the KJV [King James Version]) … The word נפשי [NahPhSheeY], lit., my soul, is simply a Hebrew idiom for the personal pronoun… used here and elsewhere for metrical reasons.” (Meek, 1956, pp. VI 24-25)  
-18. And I say,
“Lost [אבד, ’ahBahD] is my victory [נצחי, NeeTsHeeY] and ability from YHVH.”  
-19. Remember my affliction and my wandering [ומרודי, OoMeROoDeeY],
wormwood and poison.  
“The verb זכר [ZahKhoR] can be taken as imperative, remember, or better as the infinitive construct, ‘the thought of’…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-20. Remember [זכור, ZahKhOR],
remember [תזכור, TheeZKOR] and meditate [ותשיח (Kethîbh - "scripture"), VeThahSheeY-ahH] upon me, my soul.  
“The first verb has the emphatic infinitive absolute construction and its subject is נפשי [NahPhSheeY], my soul = ‘I’; hence, ‘I am thinking of it’…The reading of the Qerê [margin note], many MSS [manuscripts], Targ. [Targum, the ancient Hebrew and Aramaic commentary on the Hebrew Bible], Lucian, Symm. [Symmachus], and Vulg. [Vulgate – the authorized Latin translation of the Bible] (followed by RSV and KJV), תשוח [ThahShOo-ahH] (from שחח [ShahHahH], ‘to be bowed down’) is preferable to תשיח [ThahSheeY-ahH] (from שיח [SheeY-ahH], ‘to meditate’), which is the reading of the Kethîbh [the received text of the Hebrew Bible], LXX [the Septuagint; the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible], and O.L. [Old Latin].” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-21. That I return unto my heart,
upon such [על כן, `ahL KayN] I am enabled:
-22. Mercies of YHVH,
for we did not cease [תמנו, ThahMNOo],
for did not fail [כלו, KhahLOo], his mercies,  
“The noun חסדי [HahÇDaY], an abstract plural, ‘mercy,’ or steadfast love, is in the casus pendens2 , and כי [KeeY] introduces an object clause in apposition to זות [ZOTh], ‘this,’ of vs. 21. The verb תמנו [ThahMNOo] is an irregular form (cf. Num. [Numbers] 17:13 [Hebrews 17:28]; Jer. 44:18) for תמונו [ThahMOoNOo], ‘we cease,’ which makes no sense here…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-23. new [ones] to mornings;
multitudinous is your faithfulness.  
“In לבקרים [LahBQahReeYM], the ל is distributive, hence, every morning.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-24. “My portion is YHVH,”
said my soul,
“thereby [על כן, `ahL KayN] I am enabled to him.”  
“The words נפשי אמרה [‘ahMRaH NahPhSheeY], says my soul, with the verb in the perfect of instantaneous action, better, ‘I said’… make the line 2+2+3. In לו [LO] we have the ל of specification. The thought of this and the following verses is rather frequent in the psalms, but unusual in a lament.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-25. Good is YHVH to his hoper,
to a soul seekןמע him [תדרשנו, TheeDReShehNOo].  
“The verb קוה [QahVaH] here is ‘to wait eagerly,’ ‘to crave’ rather than simply ‘to wait.’ The Qerê reads the plural, ‘to those who crave for him,’ the Kethîbh, the singular, which agrees better with the context.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 25)  
-26. Good and enabled and dumb
to [the] salvation of YHVH.  
“The words ויחיל ודומם [VeYahHeeYL VeDOMahM] must be emended because there is not root חיל [HeeYL], ‘to wait,’ and דומם [DOMahM], as a noun, is impossible after wāw [ו]. The simplest reading and the one best fitting the context is that of the LXX, ויחל ודמם, where the first wāw introduces a subject clause, יחל is the Piel perfect of יחל, ‘to wait,’ and ודמם, ‘and he is quiet,’ is a clause in the adverbial accusative of manner (also in vs. 28), best reproduced in English by an adverb, quietly.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-27. Good to a brave,
for he bore a yoke in his youths;  
“The meter is 2+3, not 3+2… For the thought cf. Heb. [Hebrew] 12:7-11.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-28. he sits alone [בדד, BahDahD] and is dumb,
for He laid [it] upon him.  
“Translate כי [KeeY] because or ‘since’… rather that when; it is better also to understand God as the subject of נטל [NahTahL] ‘he has laid,’ ‘loaded’, than to take it as indefinite (so RSV)… Vss. [Verses] 28-30, constituting the yôdh-strophe, may be taken as the continuation of vs. 27… or the verb may be taken as jussive (so KJV). Since the strophes in this chapter are not always separate units and the former interpretation fits the context better, it is to be preferred.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-29. He gives in dust his mouth;
maybe he has hope.  
“The first clause is without parallel in the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], but it is a typically Oriental expression to express self-abasement.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-30. He gives to his striker a cheek,
he satiates [ישבע, YeeSBah`] in rebuke [בחרפה, BeHehRPaH].  
“Cf. Isa. [Isaiah] 50:63 .” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-31. For He will not abandon ever, my Lords.  
“The line may be scanned as 2+2, but it is probable that some word … was lost by haplography [the omission in writing or copying of one of two or more adjacent and similar letters, syllables, words, or lines] in the second stich (cf. Targ., which has ‘his servants’) either before or after אדוני ['ahDONah-eeY, “my Lords”]. (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-32. For if he aggrieves [הוגה, HOGaH]
and compassionates according to his great mercy.  
“The word כי [KeeY] can be interpreted as but after the preceding negative, or as ‘for’… or it can be taken with the following אם [‘eeM, “if”] as emphatic though.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-33. For he does not torment [ענה, `eeNaH] from his heart,
and aggrieve sons of man,  
“The verb ענה [`eeNaH] is in the perfect of experience, he does not …. afflict. Willingly… Lit., ‘from his heart.’ … The verb ויגה [VahYahGeH] may be the Piel [emphatic form] of יגה, contracted from ויגה [VahYahGeH], or it may be pointed as Hiphil [active] (cf. vs. 32).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 26)  
-34. to crush [לדכא, LeDahKay’] under his feet all prisoners [of the] land,
-35. to turn away [להטות, LeHahTOoTh] from justice a brave against [the] face of Supreme [עליון `ehLYON],
-36. to pervert [לעות, Le`ahVayTh] a man in his contention;
my Lords does not see.  
“The syntax of vv [verses] 34-36 is difficult.” (Guinan, 1990, p. 561)  
“Some scholars follow the Targ. and interpret the last clause as a question, ‘Does the Lord not see?’ They maintain that approve is not a legitimate translation of ראה [Rah'aH], ‘to see,’ but this can perhaps be defended from the English ‘to countenance.’” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 27)  
-37. Who is this?
He says and it is.
My Lords does not command?
-38. From [the] mouth of Supreme does not go out the evils and the good?
-39. What complains [יתאונן, YeeTh’ONayN] ’ahDahM alive, a brave upon his sin?  
-40. Let us find our ways,
and let us search and turn again until YHVH?  
“Beginning with this verse and running to the end of vs. 47, the poet identifies himself with his people.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 27)  
-41. We bear our hearts unto palms,
unto ’ayL [God] in skies.  
“The expression used here is found nowhere else in Hebrew, but manifestly means wholehearted prayer…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 27)  
-42. We [נחנו, NahHNOo] did crime and we rebelled;
you did not forgive.  
-43. You covered [סכתה, ÇahKhoThah] in fury, and you pursued us,
you killed, you did not pity [תחמל, HahMahLThah];
-44. screened [סכותה, ÇahKhOThaH] in a cloud to you
from passing over prayer.  
“…לך [LahKh], thyself, with the ל of specification.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 27)  
-45. Garbage [סחי, ÇeHeeY] and refuse [ומאוס, OoMah’OÇ] you place us within the peoples;
-46. open [פצו, PahTsOo] upon us their mouth all our enemies.  
“This verse is identical with 2:16a and is probably a direct quotation here. Six MSS and the Syriac place the פ [P] strophe (vss. 46-48) after the ע [`] strophe (vss. 49-51), thus putting the letters in their regular order.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-47. Fear and pit were to us,
the devastation [השאת, HahSay'Th] and the breaking.  
“Note the assonance in פחד ופחת [PahHahD VePahHahTh], panic and pitfall… appearing again in Jer. 48:43; Isa. 24:17. It is strange that the first two nouns have no article, while the last two have…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-48. Streams of [פלגי, PahLGaY] water descend [from] my eye,
upon breaking [of] Daughter [of] My People.  
“In this verse, belonging in thought to the following strophe, the poet returns to the lament which he interrupted in vs. 40. The second stich is a duplicate of one in 2:11, and the first is almost identical with one in 1:16.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-49. My eye flows [נגרה, NeeGRaH] and does not cease [תדמה, TheeDMeH],
from lack of the respites [הפגות, HahPhooGOTh].  
“The verb נגרה [NeeGRaH] must be in the perfect of certainty, ‘shall flow.’ The form [הפגות, HahPhooGOTh] an abstract plural, respite, is found only here (but cf. פוגת [PhOoGahTh], ‘respite,’ in 2:18)” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-50. Until looked down [ישקיף, YahShQeeYPh] and saw, YHVH, from skies.
-51. My eye dealt severity [עוללה, `OLeLaH] to my soul,
from all [the] daughters [of] my city.  
“At the fate of is a paraphrase of מן [MeeN], because of.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-52. Hunting they hunted me like a bird, my enemies, freely [חנם, HeeNahM],
-53. imperiled [צמתו, TsahMThOo] in a hole my life,
and threw [וידו, VahYahDOo] rock in me.  
“The verb וידו [VahYahDOo], and cast, is the Piel of ידה [YahDaH, “to throw, cast”], contracted from ויידו [VaY-YahDOo] (cf. ויגה [VahYahGaH] in verse 33).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-54. They overlay [צפו, TsahPhOo] waters upon my head,
I said, “I am cut off [נגזרתי, NeeGZahRTheeY]!”
-55. I called your name, YHVH,
from a hole underneath [תחתיות, ThahHTheey-OTh].  
“From the depths of the pit: Lit., ‘from the pit of depth,’ the last word being an abstract plural.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 28)  
-56. My voice you heard,
do not disappear [תעלם, Thah`LayM] your ear to my relief [לרוחתי, LeRahVHahTheeY], to my yell.  
“The verb עלם [`ahLahM], hide… is nowhere else used with אזן [‘oZeN] ear, or with the preposition ל [L], ‘to,’ but with מן [MeeN], ‘from.’ The word לרוחתי [LeRahVHahTheeY], ‘to my respite,’ makes no sense here…The last word, לשועתי [LeShahV`ahTheeY], to my supplication,’ may be a gloss on the preceding word, but it is more likely a variant reading, thus giving us a conflate text.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 29)  
-57. You approached in day,
I will call you,
you said,
“Do not fear.”  
“The verb אקראך [‘eQRah‘ehKhah] is frequentative imperfect; translate accordingly, ‘whenever I called on thee.’”  
-58. You multiplied, my Lords, [the] contentions of my soul;
you redeemed [גאלת, Gah’ahLThah] my life.  
“… the plural ריבי נפשי [ReeYBaY NahPhSheeY], the causes of my soul, is most unusual…. If ריבי plural is original, it must be an abstract plural; or the word may be singular construct with the helping yôdh [י], which is found rather often in Hebrew poetry (see examples in 1:1; also עלי [`ahLaY] in 4:5)” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 29)  
-59. You saw, YHVH, my wrong [עותתי, `ahVahThahTheeY],
you judged my judgment,
-60. you saw all their vengeance,
all their thoughts to me.  
-61. You heard their reproach, YHVH,
all their thoughts upon me,
-62. lips of my usurpers [קמי, QahMah-eeY],
and their logic upon me all the day.
-63. Their sitting and their usurpation you observed [הביטה, HahBeeYTaH];
I am their song [מנגינתם, MahNGeeYNahThahM].
-64. Return to them recompense [גמול, GahMOoL], YHVH,
according to [the] doings [of] their hands.  
“The imperfects here and in vss. 65-66 are regularly taken as future, but it is assuredly better to take them as precative because lamentations regularly end in a prayer. Vs. 64 reads, lit., ‘Mayest thou bring retribution on them, O Yahweh, according to the work of their hands,’ which is almost identical with Ps. 28:4b.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 29)  
-65. Give to them sorrow of [מגמת, MeGeeNahTh] heart,
your curse [תאלתך, Thah’ahLahThKhah] to them.  
“The compound מגנת-לב [MeGeeNahTh-LayB] is found only here, but its Arabic cognate suggests the meaning ‘derangement of mind.’” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 30)  
-66. Pursue in fury,
and destroy them [ותשמידם, VeThahShMeeYDahM] from under [the] skies of YHVH.  
Footnotes  
1 Qal: In Hebrew grammar, the qal is the simple paradigm of the verb. The Classical Hebrew verb conjugates according to person and number in two finite tenses, the perfect and the imperfect. Both of these can then be modified by means of prefixes and suffixes to create other "actions" of the verb. This is not exactly parallel to any categories of grammatical voice or mood in the Indo-European languages, but can produce similar results. So the niphal is effectively a passive, the piel is an emphatic form and the hithpael has a middle or reflexive force. The qal is any form of the finite verb paradigm which is not so modified. Wikipedia  
2 Casus pendens is “a noun or noun equivalent freed from the position it would occupy within a normal clause and placed at the head of the sentence. It does not really occupy the first position of the clause but is placed outside it (‘extra-position’) and reference to it is usually made by an anaphoric or resumptive pronoun. Its function is not to place the emphasis on the nominal part of the sentence now placed at the beginning but to mark off the topic to be considered. If we take I Kgs. [Kings] 12:17 as an example, a normal sentence would run: ‘Instead Rehoboam ruled of the Israelites who dwelt in the cities of Judah’; whereas, the construction with ‘casus pendens’ becomes ‘Instead (as for the) Israelites who lived in the cities of Judah (‘casus pendens’). Rehoboam ruled over them (resumptive pronoun)’. The Syntax of the Verb in Classical Hebrew Prose By Alviero Niccacci  
3 [footnote to 3:30] Isaiah 50:6
ו גֵּוִי נָתַתִּי לְמַכִּים, וּלְחָיַי לְמֹרְטִים; פָּנַי לֹא הִסְתַּרְתִּי, מִכְּלִמּוֹת וָרֹק.
6 I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; I hid not my face from shame and spitting.
http://www.mechon-mamre.org  
STUDY AIDS  
A Hebrew - English Bible According to the Masoretic Text and the JPS 1917 Edition © 2005 all rights reserved to Mechon Mamre for this HTML version. http://www.mechon-mamre.org/  
An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible
submitted by bikingfencer to biblestudy [link] [comments]

[Lamentations chapter 2; Jerusalem reduced to cannibalism](https://esv.literalword.com/?q=Lamentations+2)

LAMENTATIONS   Chapter Two  
Distress [צערה, *Tsah`ahRaH] of TseeYON [Zion], their fall [נגרם, NahGRahM] upon hands of the Name [ה', Hah’]  
-1. How he disgraces [יעיב, Yah`eeYB] in his fury [באפו, Be’ahPO], my Lords, [את, ’ehTh] Daughter TseeYON, sent forth from skies [to] land,
[the] splendor [תפארת, TheePh’ehRehTh] [of] YeeSRah-’ayL [“Strove God”, Israel],
and he does not remember the stool [הדמ, HahDoM] of his legs in [the] day [of] his fury.  
“The word יעיב [YaheeYB*] is regularly derived from עוב [*OoB], ‘to becloud,’ but it is better derived, with Ehrlich, et al. [and others], from a middle yôdh root which is found in Arabic and means ‘to disgrace.’ As it stands, the verb is frequentative imperfect, but the LXX [the Septuagint, the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible] reads the perfect. The splendor of Israel may be the temple (cf. [compare with] Isa [Isaiah]. 64:11 [Hebrew 64:10]) or the city (cf. Isa. 13:19), cast down like a falling star (cf. Isa. 14:12) …” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 16)  
“His footstool] The ark of the covenant…” (Adam Clarke, 1831, p. IV 150)  
-2. Swallowed [בלע, *BeeLah*], my Lords, **no pity**, [את, *’ehTh*] all habitations [נאות, *Ne’OTh*] [of] Yah-ahQoB ["YHVH Followed", Jacob];
threw down [הרס, HahRahÇ], in his crossing, strongholds of [מבצרי, MeeBTsRaY] Daughter YeHOo-DaH ["YHVH Knew", Judah],
arrived [הגיע, HeeGeeY`ah] to [the] land,
defiled [חלל, HeeLayL] her kingdom and her princes.  
“The verb בלע [BeeLah`], he hath swallowed up… appears again in vss. [verses] 5, 8, 16. The clauseחמל לא [Lo‘ HahMahL], without mercy… is in the adverbial accusative of manner, lit. [literally], ‘in that he did not show mercy’ … The same construction appears again in vss. 17, 21; 3:43. The word חלל [HeeLayL], ‘he has degraded’… is taken with the preceding verb by the RSV [Revised Standard Version] as adverbial, in dishonor, but this is contrary to the accents and it spoils the parallelism… The meter is clearly 2+3.” (Meek, 1956, pp. VI 16-17)  
-3. Hewed [גדע, GahDah`] in flared [בחרי, BahHahReeY] nostril every horn [of] YeeSRah-’ayL,
withdrew [השיב, HaySheeYB] rearward his right [hand], from before [the] enemy,
and burned in Yah-`ahQoB like fire,
a flame consuming around.  
“The might is, lit., the horn, a frequent symbol of strength in the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (again in vs. [verse] 17)… The meter of the last line is 2+2+2… The last stich is a relative clause, with the relative particle understood and the verb is in the perfect of experience, ‘which consumes the neighborhood’…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 17)  
-4. Drew [דרך, DahRahKh] his bow, like an enemy,
set [נצב, NeeTsahB] his right [hand] like a distressor,
and killed all desirables of eye
in [the] tent [of] Daughter TseeYON;
poured out [שפך, ShahPhahKh] like fire his heat.  
“As regularly set up, this verse lacks a final stich… All the pride of our eyes: Lit., ‘all the desirable ones of the eye’…the first word being the same as that used of inanimate things in 1:10-11 (cf. 1:7), ‘treasures’.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 17)  
-5. Was, my Lords, like an enemy,
he swallowed up YeeSRah-’ayL,
he swallowed up all her palaces [ארמנותיה, ‘ahRMeNOThaYHah],
destroyed [שחת, ShahHahTh] its fortresses,
and multiplied in [the] house of YeHOo-DaH her moaning [תאניה, Thah’ahNYaH] and her mourning [ואניה, Vah’ahNYaH].  
“The כ [K, “like, as”] here expresses identity (usually called the kaph veritatis… it is better to call it the asservative kaph… ‘The Lord has really become an enemy’ or ‘has become a veritable enemy.’ The word ארמנותיה [‘ahRMeNOThaYHah], her palaces, must be emended to ‘his palaces’ to agree with his strongholds and the masculine antecedent of both, Israel [nah; I think the antecedent is Jerusalem]. Mourning and lamentation: Better, ‘mourning and moaning’… because this brings out the paronomasia1 of the original [תאניה ואניה Tah‘ahNYaH Vah‘ahNYaH].” (Meek, 1956, pp. VI 17-18)  
-6. And he violated [ויחמס, VahYahHeMoÇ], like his garden booth [שכו, SooKO],
ruined [שחת, SheeHayTh] his assembly [מועדו, MO`ahDO],
made forget, YHVH, in TseeYON, assembly,
and made cease [ושבת, VeShahBahTh] and scorned [וינאץ, VahYeeN’ahTs], in his furious anger [בזעם-אפו, BeZah`ahM-’ahPO], king and priest.  
“The word שכו [SooKO], his booth, is found only here with ש [S] in place of ס [Ç]; it is parallel to [MO`ahDO]… i.e. [in other words], Yahweh destroyed his booth, the temple, as easily and with as little concern as one destroys a booth erected temporarily for shelter in a harvest field (cf. Isa. 1:8).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 18)  
-7. Abandoned [זנח, ZahNahH], my Lords, from his altar,
rejected [נאר, Nee’ayR] from his sanctuary,
closed in [the] hand of an enemy [the] walls of her palaces,
a voice they gave in House YHVH like a day [of] assembly.  
“The word נאר [Nee‘ayR] is found only here and in Ps. [Psalm] 89:39 (Hebrew 89:40), and its meaning, disowned, is a conjecture from the context… A clamor was raised: Lit., ‘they [indefinite] gave a shout’ (cf. Ps. 74:4).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 18)  
-8. Thought, YHVH, to ruin [the] walls [of] Daughter TseeYON,
stretched [נטה, NahTaH] a cord,
did not withdraw his hand from swallowing and aggrieving [ויאבל, VahYah’ahBahL];
rampart [חל, HayL] and wall together were made miserable [אמללו, ’ooMLahLOo].  
“… he hath stretched out a line, i.e., a plummet line, to discover defects, a figure drawn from building (cf. Amos 7:7-9…). This is a clear example of the 2+3 variant.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 18)  
-9. They sank [טבעו, TahB`Oo] in [the] land,
her gates destroyed [אבד, ’eeBayD], and broken her bolts [בריחיה, BReeYHehYHah].
Her queen and her princes were in nations.
There is no instruction [תורה, ThORaH],
also her prophets did not find vision from YHVH.  
“In the word בארץ [Bah‘ahRehTs], into the ground, the ב [B] is both terminative and locative. Since the line is too long metrically, one of the two synonymous verbs in the second stich must be taken as a variant reading, thus giving us a conflate text. The words עין תורה [`ayN [sic for אין, ’ayN] ThORaH], against the M.T. [Masoretic Text, the Hebrew Bible] punctuation, should be taken as a new clause, ‘there is no instruction,’ with the last word referring to priestly instruction, as indicated by the context and by comparison with Jer. 18:18… scarcely the law.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 19)  
-10. They sit to [the] land,
are dumb [ידמו, YeeDMOo],
elders of Daughter TseeYON.  
“The verbs in this line are both imperfect, but most scholars emend with the LXX and O.L. [Old Latin] (plus the Syriac, Vulg. [Vulgate], and Targ. [Targum, the ancient Hebrew and Aramaic commentary on the Hebrew Bible] for the first) to the perfect, to agree with the other verbs in the verse.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 19)  
They ascended dust [עפר, `ahPhahR] upon their head,
girded [הגרו, HahGROo] sacks,
descended to [the] land their head, virgin of Jerusalem.  
-11. Exhausted [כלו, KahLOo] in tears my eyes,
roiled [חמרמרו, HahMahRMahROo], my bowels,
poured to [the] land my liver,
upon [the] breaking [שבר ShehBehR] [of] [the] daughter [of] my people,
in fainting [בעטף, BayahTayPh*] [of] toddler [עולל, *OoLahL] and suckling [ויונק, VeYONayQ] in streets [of the] city.  
“The last clause in the first line also appears in 1:20… my liver, was regarded by the Hebrews as a seat of the emotions; for the metaphor cf. vs. 19; Ps. 62:8 (Hebrew 62:9). The word בעטף [Bay`ahTayPh], ‘because of the fainting,’ as pointed, is the causal (not temporal) ב [B], plus the Niphal infinitive construct3 , with the syncope of ה [H]; better pointed as Qal4 . In the streets of the city: Lit., ‘in the broad places of the city’; hence, ‘in the city squares’…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 19)  
-12. To their mothers they say,
“Where [איה, ’ahYayH] is grain [דגן, DahGahN] and wine?”
in their fainting [בהתעטפם, BeHeeTh`ahTPhahM] like a casualty [כחלל, KehHahLahL] in streets [of the] city,
in pouring out [בהשתפך, BeHeeShTahPayKh] their soul unto [the] bosom [חיק, HaYQ] [of] their mothers.  
“When their soul was poured out into their mothers’ bosom] When, in endeavouring to draw nourishment from the breasts of their exhausted mothers, they breathed their last in their bosoms!” (Adam Clarke, 1831, p. IV 151)  
“The verb יאמרו [Yo’MROo] is imperfect to express frequentative action; hence ‘they keep saying’ (Amer. Trans.) …The preposition אל [‘ehL], ‘to,’ should be על [`ahL], on, a frequent mistake in the M.T.” (Meek, 1956, pp. VI 19-20)  
-13. What will I testify [about] you [אעידך, ’ah`eeYDayKh],
what will I liken [אדמה, ’ahDahMeH] to you, the daughter Jerusalem?
What will I equate [אשוה, ’ahSheVeH] to you and comfort you [ואנחמך, Vah’ahNahHahMayKh], virgin daughter [of] TseeYON?
For great as a sea is your breaking;
who will healer be to you?  
“The Qerê [marginal note] אעידך [’aheeYDayKh*; but this is the *Kethîbh* (written text) in my Hebrew Bible] is the Hiphil^5 of עוד [*OoD], which Ehrlich shows appears again in Jer. 49:19 and has the meaning ‘to liken,’ as indicated by the Vulg.: hence, ‘To what can I liken you?’ (Amer. Trans.), exactly parallel to the following stich. The compound vocative, ‘O daughter Jerusalem,’ is unusual… one MS [manuscript] and the LXX have the usual construct O daughter of Jerusalem, as in the next line, O virgin daughter of Zion.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 20)  
“Thy breach is great like the sea] Thou hast a *flood of afflictions, - a sea of troubles, - an ocean of miseries.” (Adam Clarke, 1831, pp. IV 151-152)  
-14. Your prophets envisioned to you worthlessness [שוא, ShahVe’] and failure [ותפל, VeThahPhayL],
and did not reveal upon your iniquity to restore your captivity,
and envisioned to you burdens worthless and seductions [ומדוחים, OoMahDOoHeeYM].  
“The verb חזו [HahZOo], have seen, is better rendered ‘have divined’… since the root means ‘to see ecstatically.’ False and deceptive visions: Lit., ‘emptiness and whitewash’; hence, ‘stuff and nonsense’… the reference being to the false or professional prophets who did not do their duty by the people but misled them cf. Isa. 3:12…), and so brought them into their misfortune… The word מדוחים [MahDOoHeeYM], found only here, is an abstract plural noun, best translated into English by an adjective, misleading.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 20)  
-15. They spank [ספקו, ÇahPhQOo] upon you palms, all passers-by [the] way,
they shriek [שרקו, ShahRQOo] and wag [וינעו, VeYahN`Oo] their head upon Daughter Jerusalem:
“Is that the city that they said,
‘Perfection of [כלילת, KLeeYLahTh] beauty, gladness [משוש, MahSOSh] to all the land!?’”  
“The verb ספקו [ÇahPhQOo] is a perfect of experience, ‘they clap,’ i.e., in malicious delight and mockery (cf. Job 27:23…). The word שיאמרו [ShehYo‘MROo] has the relative particle ש [Sh], in place of the more usual אשר [‘ahShehR], plus an imperfect of customary action, indefinite third person plural; hence, ‘which they used to call.’ The line is a tristich, in 2+3+3, but the last stich may be a marginal gloss from Ps. 48:2 (Hebrew 48:3), or it may be a variant reading, thus giving us a conflate text.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 20)  
-16. They burst upon you their mouth,
all your enemies shriek and gnash [ויחרקו, VeYahHahRQOo] tooth;
they said:
“We swallowed [her] up,
surely [אך, ’ahKh] this is the day, that we anticipated it;
we have found it, seen it!”  
“Five MSS [manuscripts], Lucian, the Syriac, and Arabic have this verse after vs. 17, thus putting the ע [`] and פ [P] stanzas in regular order. Rail against you: Lit., ‘open their mouth against you,’ with this verb and the following three in the perfect of experience.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 21)  
-17. Did, YHVH, that [which] they had plotted,
accomplished [בצע, BeeTsah`] his saying that he commanded from days previous,
he threw down [הרס, HahRahÇ] and did not pity.
And was happy upon you, [the] enemy,
raised horn, your distressor.  
“The clause אשר צוה [‘ahShehR TseeVaH] is in the accusative of specification, lit., ‘in the matter of that which he ordained’; hence,as he ordained…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 21)  
-18. Shouted, their heart, unto my Lords, wall of Daughter TseeYON,
descended like a river her tear day and night.
Do not give respite [פוגת, PhOoGahTh] to yourself,
do not be dumb [תדם, TheeDoM], daughter [of] your eyes.  
“The first line as it stands makes no sense… it is very difficult to explain how such a simple text became so corrupt. The word יומם [YOMahM], ‘by day,’ is one of the few adverbs in Hebrew. The word פוגת [PhOoGahTh], respite or rest, found only here, is not construct, but a noun with the old feminine in tāw. Your eyes: Lit., ‘the daughter of your eye,’ i.e., the pupil of the eye according to Ps. 17:8, or perhaps the product of the eye, i.e., tears, as in Arabic (see Edward Robertson, ‘The Apple of the Eye in the Masoretic Text’…). The RSV [Revised Standard Version] makes the verb imperative, but it is in the jussive [a form of a verb expressing an indirect command], as in the KJV [King James Version].” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 21)  
-19. Arise, chant in night to [the] head [of] guards [אשמרות, ‘ahShMooROTh],
pour out [שפכי, SheePhKheeY] like waters your heart in the presence of [נכח, NoKhahH] [the] face of my Lords,
lift [שאי, Se’eeY] unto him your palms upon [the] soul [of] your toddlers,
the fainting in hunger in [the] head [of] every courtyard.  
“The words לראש אשמרות [LeRo‘Sh ‘ahShMooROTh], with distributive ל [L] and not point of time… mean ‘as the watches begin,’ i.e., continually through the night, which was divided by the Hebrews into three watches (cf. Judg. [Judges] 7:19). Since this stanza, like 1:7, has four lines, most scholars delete the last line as a gloss based on vs. 12 and 4:1, 4, but it is probable that the M,T. represents a conflate text, with the second line a variant of the first…” (Meek, 1956, pp. VI 21-22)  
-20. See, YHVH, and look to whom you have done [עוללת, `OLahLThah] thus [כה, KoH],
if consume, women, their fruit, toddlers nursing [טפחים, TeePooHeeYM],
if are killed in [the] Sanctuary [of] my Lords, priest and prophet.  
“This verse and the following two are put in the mouth of the city as the response to the poet’s appeal in vs, 19. The two clauses beginning with אם [‘eeM] are explanatory of כה [KoH], thus, with the alternative use of אם in an interrogative sentence. This verse indicates that Jerusalem was actually reduced to cannibalism in the siege of 586 (cf. 4:10; Jer. 19:9).” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 22)  
-21. Laid to land, courtyards, youth and elderly,
my virgins and my first-born felled by sword.
You killed in a day [of] your fury,
You slaughtered; you did not pity.  
“The word חוצות [HOoTsOTh] in the M.T. must be in the adverbial accusative, in the streets.” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 22)  
-22. Call out as a day [of] assembly,
my dread [מגורי, MeeGOoRah-eeY] from around.
And there was not, in [the] day [of the] fury [of] YHVH, refugee and remnant
that I had nursed and multiplied;
my enemy finished them.  
“The verb תקרא [TheeQRaH] is imperfect and may be interpreted as frequentative, ‘Thou didst keep inviting,’ or as an archaism preserving the early preterit, which disappeared from Hebrew prose in the course of time, but survives sporadically in poetry, Thou didst invite… It is used here because it has the initial ת [Th] required by the acrostic scheme. The word מגורי [MeeGOoRah-eeY] may be derived from גור, ‘to sojourn’ (so LXX), but comparison with the expression, ‘terror all around,’ in Jer. 6:25, et al., indicates that it is better derived from גור, ‘to fear,’ with the subjective suffix (so Syriac and Vulg.), ‘those whom I fear,’ i.e. ‘my enemies,’…” (Meek, 1956, p. VI 22)  
“The day of God’s wrath is like a victory banquet, but Israel is the slaughtered food (Isa 34). There is no prayer against enemies here (as in 1:21-22; 3:60-66; 4:21-22), for Yahweh is the enemy (v 5).” (Guinan, 1990, p. 561)  
Footnotes  
1 According to the earlier grammarians, כְּ‍‎ is sometimes used pleonastically, i.e. not to indicate a similarity (… i.e. something like), but simply to introduce the predicate (Kaph veritatis), e.g. Neh [Nehemiah] 7 for he was כְּאִישׁ אֱמֶת‎ [Ke‘eeYSh ‘ehMehTh] a faithful man… Such a pleonasm is of course out of the question. At the most a Kaph veritatis can only be admitted in the sense that the comparison is sometimes introduced by כְּ‍‎ with a certain emphasis (equivalent to in every respect like); thus כְּאִישׁ אֱמֶת‎ in Neh 7 means simply of the nature of a faithful man, i.e. as only a faithful man can be…
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Gesenius%27_Hebrew_Grammar_(1910_Kautzsch-Cowley_edition).djvu/400  
2 Paronomasia "pun," 1570s, from Latin, from Greek paronomasia "play upon words which sound similarly,"
3 Niphal is the name given to one of the seven major verb stems in biblical Hebrew. The designation Niphal comes from the form niph‘al for the verb pa‘al, “to do”. The nun (נ) prefix is characteristic of the QTL (perfect) conjugation, as well as of the participle. In the YQTL (imperfect) conjugation, the nun is (where possible) assimilated into the first root consonant and appears as a dagesh forte. In the imperative and infinitive construct, the prefix is a he (ה) instead of a nun. …
The Niphal stem usually denotes the passive or the reflexive voice. - Wikipedia  
4 Qal - In Hebrew grammar, the qal is the simple paradigm of the verb.
The Classical Hebrew verb conjugates according to person and number in two finite tenses, the perfect and the imperfect. Both of these can then be modified by means of prefixes and suffixes to create other "actions" of the verb. This is not exactly parallel to any categories of grammatical voice or mood in the Indo-European languages, but can produce similar results. So the niphal is effectively a passive, the piel is an emphatic form and the hithpael has a middle or reflexive force. The qal is any form of the finite verb paradigm which is not so modified. – Wikipedia
5 When accessing information about verbs throughout our Old Testament concordances, you'll find numerous references to Hebrew verb tenses such as Qal or Hiphil. The following list identifies each; verb tense and its part in speech via a comparative example in English using the verb "to kill."  
Simple  
Qal (active) - he killed
Niphal (passive) - he was killed  
Intensive - giving force or emphasis; emphasizing [very in the very same man is an intensive adverb]  
Piel (active) - he killed indeed! / he slaughtered
Pual (passive) - he was killed indeed! / he was slaughtered
Hithpael (reflexive) - he killed himself  
Causative - expressing causation, as certain verbs [fell is a causative verb meaning to cause to fall]  
Hiphil (active) - he caused to kill
Hophal (passive) - he was caused to kill - https://www.blueletterbible.org   An Amateur's Journey Through the Bible
submitted by bikingfencer to biblestudy [link] [comments]

conjugated verbs agree with their subjects video

Ginger Baker-Sanhueza - YouTube Subject Verb Agreement Basic Rules - YouTube #2 Pronouns & Conjugation (GwP1) - Deutsch lernen SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT TEST #1: Indefinite Pronouns Making Subjects and Verbs Agree Rule 9: Subject Verb Agreement - YouTube The 50 Most Common Irregular Verbs in English Grammar ... Subject Verb Agreement: 10 Rules to Improve English Grammar! / 主語と動詞の一致: 英文法を上達させる10のルール！ AGREEMENT OF VERB WITH ITS SUBJECT ....PART 3 Spanish Subject Verb Agreement Conjugating Verbs - YouTube

Irregular Verbs. All this conjugation stuff may already seem overwhelming, but you should know that (almost) every verb tense has certain verbs that do not follow the normal rules for conjugations. Those verbs are know as “irregular” verbs. You’ll have to specifically memorize their conjugations because the normal procedures don’t work. The principle of subject-verb agreement applies to finite verbs in the present tense and, in a limited way, to the past forms of the verb to be Subjects connected by and almost always form a plural subject and demand a plural verb. Dogs and cats love to have their ears scratched. Subjects and verbs agree in person and number (I am, the tree is, they are). Some adjectives (determiners) agree with nouns in number (this man, these men). In Spanish, adjectives also agree in Do conjugated verbs agree with their subjects 1 See answer raymondmunoz8666 is waiting for your help. Add your answer and earn points. MichelleWatson MichelleWatson If there are multiple people, places, or things, then the verb is conjugated in the plural. In other words, the verb AND subject agree in number. In an earlier column I provided guidelines for making sure your verbs agree with their subjects. Now you know it should be "Either our advertising or our distribution points are [not is] the problem" because the verb agrees with the closer element when the two parts of a compound subject are joined by the conjunction or. It is clearer in other languages, but conjugated verbs in English can also sometimes tell us something about how many people are participating in the action of the verb. This is called subject-verb agreement. For example, singular subjects (he, she, it) in the present simple tense have an "s" added to them when conjugated: He sings. She reads. It rains. Verbs are action words: write, walk, run, dance, do, be, sit, listen, fidget, and contemplate are just a few verbs in the English language. Conjugating Verbs. There are two types of verbs: regular verbs and irregular verbs. All verbs get conjugated based on the subject of the sentence, which is the thing or person doing the action. Subject-verb agreement is ensuring a verb matches its subject (e.g., 'A box of matches is light' not 'are light.'). This page has examples of subject-verb agreement and covers the top 13 issues that cause subject-verb agreement errors. It also includes an interactive exercise. Learning verb conjugation rules can keep your verb tenses right, and, in turn, your conversations clear and coherent. We help you master them with ease. Subjects and verbs must agree in number. If the subject is singular, the verb must be singular too. Example: She writes every day. Exception: When using the singular "they," use plural verb forms. Example: The participant expressed satisfaction with their job. They are currently in a managerial role at the organization.

conjugated verbs agree with their subjects top

[index] [6567] [3702] [5345] [7030] [8636] [6383] [2939] [2616] [8083] [8297]

Ginger Baker-Sanhueza - YouTube

Subjects and verbs must agree in number. If the subject is singular, the verb must be singular too. Example: She writes every day. If the subject is plural, the verb must also be plural. SUBJECT VERB AGREEMENT TEST #1: Indefinite Pronouns Making Subjects and Verbs Agree Subjects and verbs must AGREE with one another in number (singular or plural). So, if the subject is singular ... This is the 2nd video in my German with Puppets Series #1. In this video my puppets and I explain the nominative case personal pronouns and the conjugation of regular verbs. Next video here: https ... These educational videos are interesting not just to captivate the young but adult viewers to learn and revise their basic English Grammar and assist them to master English in a unique way. Video ... Irregular Verbs in English! List of Irregular Verbs: https://7esl.com/irregular-verbs/The English language has a large number of irregular verbs.What are Irr... The basis of verb conjugation in Latin comes down to its subject. Is it first person, second person, or third person, and singular or plural? This will chang... Spanish subject verb agreement conjugating verbs. Conjugate verbs in Spanish. Subject verb agreement in Spanish. Spanish verb forms. How to conjugate verbs i... 5. Model Verbs: (can, could, will, would, may, might, must, should) Model verbs never change their form no matter what subject they are paired with. After a model verb you must always use the base ... This video covers the conjugations of irregular verbs in the past tense in Spanish, known as the Preterite tense. It also quotes another YouTube teacher, Senor Jordan and his irregular verb song. ... In this video, we will learn the basics of Subject-Verb Agreement.Before understanding the Subject-Verb Agreement, We will understand what is Subject and Ver...

conjugated verbs agree with their subjects

Copyright © 2024 hot.playbestrealmoneygames.xyz