Jump to content
Draco Studios Community

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Allinor said:

Clue 5:

"Vision is the art of seeing what is invisible to others"

"Mire umeth feksa umezhi mireth mrokhr tshêmiregrut va'aluteri"

From this I think 'Mire' is vision/sight and 'mireth' is 'to see', as we've established that -th is a verb infinitive ending...

Umeth/Umezhi are 'to be'/is respectively, and feksa really makes sense as 'art' being that 'fekse' means beauty!

I agree and think that 'tshêmiregrut' is probably 'invisible', making 'tshê' a negation prefix. I also think 'mrokhr' means 'what'', making that ending accusative plural for... animate nouns ("seeing what")?

This clue makes me think that the word order in Draconic is really unique though, as the order of the verbs will take a bit of work! 

Edited by Hilasar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Hilasar said:

I agree and think that 'tshêmiregrut' is probably 'invisible', making 'tshê' a negation prefix. I also think 'mrokhr' means 'what'', making that ending accusative plural for... animate nouns ("seeing what")?
 

I meant to write singular and inanimate and not plural/animate here! My brain is not cooperating this week!
 

5 minutes ago, Allinor said:

sorry, I believe  va'aluteri means "to others", va' + alut in animate dative plural form.

Agreed; Ruben mentioned that va' is a prefix on verbs that indicated lasting, as dragons live for a long time, and I guess it makes sense to have it added to nouns as well. It would make sense to be with 'others' and... would that mean that it's an animate dative plural ending? 

Edited by Hilasar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

this is just a guess, but if "mrokhr" corresponds to "what", would that make "-okhr" the inanimate accusative singular ending?

edit: I see you corrected yourself to ask this above 🙂

so "tsalkokhr" in the 2nd line of the poem could mean something like "nothing".

Edited by Allinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

what do we make of "-ut" in "tshêmiregrut"? is this the inanimate genitive singular ending?

Edited by Allinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Allinor said:

what do we make of "-ut" in "tshêmiregrut"? is this the inanimate genitive singular ending?

I thought -ut was Proper in some sort of nominative from the thank you message on Kickstarter (Varezhut Zhir = 'grateful to you'), but the two might be completely different things. Maybe this is a '-grut' or '-rut' ending. 

27 minutes ago, Allinor said:

this is just a guess, but if "mrokhr" corresponds to "what", would that make "-okhr" the inanimate accusative singular ending?

edit: I see you corrected yourself to ask this above 🙂

so "tsalkokhr" in the 2nd line of the poem could mean something like "nothing".

Yes! I am kinda confident that is accusative singular. Sorry about the confusion - it was past the editing period and I have so much stuff open on my screen! I don't know what tsalkokhr means, it could be any sort of noun in accusative; I'm only confident it's a noun because it appears by itself with that ending in that sentence! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

maybe "-ut" means "to", as in "grateful to" or "invisible to"?

sorry, for tsalkokhr, I was confusing "tsalk" with "tshê".

(I see both tshêmurut and "thsêmur’ad" in the poem, could the 2nd be a typo? 😛)

Edited by Allinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 7:18 PM, Hilasar said:

I don't know what tsalkokhr means, it could be any sort of noun in accusative; I'm only confident it's a noun because it appears by itself with that ending in that sentence! 

but we know "tsalk" is "moment", from clue 3 🙂

so "tsalkokhr" is its accusative form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clue 6:

"What orators lack in depth, they make up for in length"

"Zal umrokhr voruvnurera tshêgerakh khar'ad, zhir akamath zal fenena"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

"voruvnurera" appears to be "orators", animate nominative plural.

maybe "tshêgerakh khar'ad" corresponds to "lack in depth"? with "tshê" as the negator.

Edited by Allinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's also tempting to map "zal fenena" to "in length", inanimate dative singular.

which would make "zal umrokhr" mean "in depth"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Allinor said:

"akamath" looks like "make up for".

I don't know how to explain the "zhir" 😆

I think it works like the German 'es gefählt mir', where zhir takes the dative form. Something like 'made up for them'.

but we know "tsalk" is "moment", from clue 3 🙂

so "tsalkokhr" is its accusative form.

 

Oh, true!! Very true!

I have a few thoughts on clue 6 but will need to organize them when I get home tonight! 

Edited by Hilasar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Hilasar said:

I think it works like the German 'es gefählt mir', where zhir takes the dative form. Something like 'made up for them'.

but "zhir" is singular, you'd expect it to to be "zheri" for plural.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

maybe"-ir" isn't animate dative singular, but animate dative plural, and proper dative singular? if it's true that the cases are linked like that, as I thought yesterday.

Edited by Allinor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Allinor said:

maybe"-ir" isn't animate dative singular, but animate dative plural, and proper dative singular? if it's true that the cases are linked like that, as I thought yesterday.

no, that's not it either, looking at how"-ir" is used in clue 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holly cow, you've made some good progress and there's a lot to go through. Let's start with these

On 4/18/2019 at 9:59 AM, Hilasar said:

Oh! So just really quick before I can really go back to thinking about this - so in Draconic, abstract entities like 'Darkness' and parts of beings such as 'eye' count as animate nouns, correct? 

And on another question... may I assume that in case of Varezhut Zhir, since Ruben has confirmed that adjectives take the same ending as nouns like Spanish, that -ut would be a Proper noun plural nominative ending (In the case of 'we are grateful to you')? I don't know if that'd be for ones ending in consonants or vowels, but I thought it was worth a shot! 

-ut is not an ending for nounst

On 4/18/2019 at 12:07 PM, Allinor said:

"tshê" looks like negation.

correct!

On 4/18/2019 at 12:23 PM, Hilasar said:

From this I think 'Mire' is vision/sight and 'mireth' is 'to see', as we've established that -th is a verb infinitive ending...

Umeth/Umezhi are 'to be'/is respectively, and feksa really makes sense as 'art' being that 'fekse' means beauty!

I agree and think that 'tshêmiregrut' is probably 'invisible', making 'tshê' a negation prefix. I also think 'mrokhr' means 'what'', making that ending accusative plural for... animate nouns ("seeing what")?

This clue makes me think that the word order in Draconic is really unique though, as the order of the verbs will take a bit of work! 

Mireth = to see, that's correct. I can confirm that -eth is the infinitive ending for verbs

You are right about feksa and fekse, and the way dragons use animate/inanimate to convey different but related ideas.

On 4/18/2019 at 12:32 PM, Hilasar said:

I meant to write singular and inanimate and not plural/animate here! My brain is not cooperating this week!
 

Agreed; Ruben mentioned that va' is a prefix on verbs that indicated lasting, as dragons live for a long time, and I guess it makes sense to have it added to nouns as well. It would make sense to be with 'others' and... would that mean that it's an animate dative plural ending? 

you are right about mrokhr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 1:24 PM, Allinor said:

maybe "-ut" means "to", as in "grateful to" or "invisible to"?

sorry, for tsalkokhr, I was confusing "tsalk" with "tshê".

(I see both tshêmurut and "thsêmur’ad" in the poem, could the 2nd be a typo? 😛)

Nope, there's no typo 😉

3 hours ago, Allinor said:

"voruvnurera" appears to be "orators", animate nominative plural.

maybe "tshêgerakh khar'ad" corresponds to "lack in depth"? with "tshê" as the negator.

Yes voruvnurera means orators, it is also a tongue-twister of a word

Also you are correct about tshêgerakh khar'ad

3 hours ago, Allinor said:

it's also tempting to map "zal fenena" to "in length", inanimate dative singular.

which would make "zal umrokhr" mean "in depth"?

Correct!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's good to know we're getting places 🙂

40 minutes ago, Ruben said:

Nope, there's no typo 😉

it's usually "tshê", so "thsê" looks weird 😛

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Ruben said:

Holly cow, you've made some good progress and there's a lot to go through. Let's start with these

-ut is not an ending for nounst

 

Hmm... am I to assume that for proper nouns and pronouns, adjectives don't share noun endings then, if Varezhut means 'grateful' (as in 'we are grateful')? 

I am a little confused with all the new discoveries and will need to take some time to process, but I've liked the clues thus far! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Ruben said:

 

Allinor said: maybe "tshêgerakh khar'ad" corresponds to "lack in depth"? with "tshê" as the negator.

Also you are correct about tshêgerakh khar'ad

Allinor said: 

it's also tempting to map "zal fenena" to "in length", inanimate dative singular.

which would make "zal umrokhr" mean "in depth"?

Correct!

Wait, question: which one of the two are correct about the 'in depth' translation? It's been confirmed that -okhr is an ending for accusative on previous posts, but here Allinor says dative for zal fenena...

And also that 'mrokhr' means 'what', which is similar to 'umrokhr'. Does draconic have double negation, by any chance? 

 


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hiya, @Ruben

 

Haven't been online much in the last few days for a few reasons, but I wanted to get back to the dragons and, gathering the last few clues, I wanted to ask about a few thoughts.

About the -ut ending - Is it an adjective ending that also includes a 'to be' verb, used instead of umeth whenever an adjective is attached to a noun? The very first two lines seem to me that either this is the case, or that there aren't any verbs in them. 'Varezhut' would make sense as (we are) grateful. I might be terribly wrong!

I think that at this point it's safe to say that vkr+ending means all, mkr+ending means what, bamre is when in a previous clue and I'd guess bamra means time.

 

I believe that 'tshêgerakh' (lack, or not-have) is a combination of the negative and the verb 'to have', and gerakh, to have.

-okhr is the accusative singular for inanimate nouns.

-ena is the dative singular for inanimate nouns.

-esh seems to be the (or a kind of) past form of verbs.

 

The following ones I'm not completely sure about:

-eni is the nominative for inanimate, plural?

-eri is the dative for animate, plural?

-rir is the dative for animate singular?

Edited by Hilasar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...