Closed lipamanka closed 1 year ago
Bump. Let's not let this issue become stale.
we've got five rockets on https://github.com/lipu-linku/pali-nimi/issues/7#issuecomment-1677724452 above. any concerns about it?
I think we can do a pull request now! six 🚀s now
I would like the "spoken exclamation mark" included but I would accept it as written above if people prefer
i think "spoken exclamation mark" captures the way that a can follow a sentence, but not the way it can follow a word or phrase.
i like the current definition because it includes all three
I think "a is like a spoken exclamation mark" can be a useful way to teach it, but IMO it doesn't vibe as accurate enough to include in a definition. It's similar to an exclamation mark, but definitely not directly equivalent.
we've got five rockets on #7 (comment) above. any concerns about it?
I feel like "emotion" is lacking from that definition.
I'd prefer this, which was mentioned here in the particles masterpost:
[puts emphasis or emotion on the phrase/sentence it follows]
A bit on the long side, but clear and accurate.
hm, what's an example of an "a" suffix that puts emotion but not emphasis on what it follows?
Well... yeah, it's hard to find examples that add emotion but not any emphasis.
But I think that there are definitely cases where "a" adds more emotion than emphasis. Most often in cases where "a" modifies the entire sentence instead of just one word or phrase.
For example, I feel that in most cases "ike a!" is closer to "I have a strong emotional response to the fact that this is bad" than "this is super bad" or "I want you to pay extra attention to the badness".
I guess I feel that emotion is very important to "a" because I originally learned Toki Pona from the jan Pije course, which was written before the a/kin merger. So "a" was taught exclusively as a word you put at the end of a sentence to express emotion, and as an interjection / for laughter.
(Emphasis was originally kin's job, before pu stole it and gave it to "a". That broader meaning of "kin" wasn't very common compared to the "also" usage, but I used to be pretty strongly in favor of re-broadening the meaning of "kin" to include emphasis. And using "a" for that, while an interesting idea in theory, felt very weird to me in practice.)
(interjection) ah, oh, ha, eh, um, oy; (particle) [adds emphasis or emotion to the sentence or phrase it follows]
(interjection) ah, oh, ha, eh, um, oy; (particle) [added after a sentence or phrase for emphasis or emotion]
i feel weird listing out "sentence or phrase" without also including "word"
listing out all three feels a little unwieldy, since this is already a pretty complex definition. maybe group them all as "idea"?
maybe group them all as "idea"?
IMO "idea" is so vague that it becomes more useful to just say "something". And to be fair, "added after something for emphasis or emotion" could work fine. Though I think it's useful to state clearly that "a" can modify an entire sentence as well as a phrase.
But I guess we could also rely on commentary to explain that, if we want to be economical with the definition. Something like:
(particle) [adds emphasis or emotion]*
* placed after the word, phrase or sentence it modifies
i feel weird listing out "sentence or phrase" without also including "word"
A phrase can also just be one word, though. Right? Let me check.
Hmm... seems like it depends on who you ask. Traditionally a phrase is considered two or more words, but many modern schools of thought don't make that distinction.
But now that I think of it, technically it's probably more correct to say that "a" is part of the phrase or sentence instead of that is follows one. And when modifying a single word, it forms a phrase. So we could go with
(particle) [placed at the end of sentence or phrase for emphasis or emotion]
or something like that.
i'd like to be inclusive of the fact that it can go after a word, within a phrase like "noka a soweli", when you're emphasizing that you're not talking about your soweli's luka
i like "something"
so then
(interjection) ah, oh, ha, eh, um, oy; (particle) [placed after something for emphasis or emotion]
That's actually probably more practical than "sentence or phrase (or word)", yeah. People can learn the specifics from other places.
I'm convinced.
funny enough, i sat here wondering why it wasn't "word/phrase", then "word/phrase/sentence", and managed to dig my way through most of the suggestions made in the discussion
then read the discussion
anyway, ilo a
also for translators we're definitely gonna need an explanation of what vibe each of those interjections has
not sure if this is the most appropirate place to ask, but for the translators, may you clarify what each interjection expresses? this is my interpretation of the current new definitions:
ah: relief oh: surprise, awe ha: laugh, chuckle eh: confusion, apathy um: filler word oy: (Jewish interjection) according to Wiktionary, 'expressing mild frustration or expressing feelings of uncertainty or concern'
for most other languages, I also suggest substituting 'oy' for 'oi', as in a shout to get someone's attention, just because this interjection doesn't exist universally
imo for other languages the translator should choose good examples of a-like words in their language. not even the english examples are universal. like in spanish "oye" might be a better fit than "oi," and in portuguese "oi" means "hi"
I still mean translating the vibes of them, so for example, 'oi' becomes 'ei' in Portuguese
a
sona pu
PARTICLE (emphasis, emotion or confirmation)
sona Linku pi toki Inli
(emphasis, emotion or confirmation)
sona Linku pi toki pona
nimi a li suli e toki e nimi lon poka
sona ku
ah⁵, oh⁵, ha⁵, ooh⁴, uh⁴, gosh⁴, whoa⁴, wow⁴, um³, huh³, uh-huh², quite², gasp², really², mm-hmm², hmm², sigh²
sona sin