Karavinka wrote:Runebia'ya lii. Lii nga hombre cha'hui sti Dios.
I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God.
lii is used for 2nd person accusative. I don't know how the personal pronouns behave in Zapotec, and I don't know what the nominative looks like. nga appears to be marking identity, and sti is one of the prepositions.
Karavinka wrote:Bigani ne biree de hombre ca.
Hold thy peace, and come out of him.
bigani is probably closer to "shut up"; ne was seen enough times that I'm sure it's "and"; de and ca aren't certain. ca is an extremely common word, might even be there just for emphasis. While this is imperative, biree matches the form found in the next sentence.
Karavinka wrote:Ca dxi que pe' biree Jesús Nazaret, ti guidxi sti Galilea
And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee
Other than confirming biree above, it seems ti guidxi sti Galilea is a relative clause. I know guidxi is "land", and sti is there again.
Karavinka wrote:Peru qué nudii be lugar niní' ca binidxaba que pa runibiá' ca laabe.
and he suffered not the demons to speak, because they knew him.
The first half of the sentences are completely un-parsable to me; binidxaba is demon, so que pa must be "because." The difference between runebia'ya and runibiá' might be either tense or person, or both.
Karavinka wrote:Ne ora bidxela ca laabe, na ca rabi ca laabe
and they found him, and say unto him
Another personal pronoun: "him." ne and na seem to be alternating, for reasons I have no idea. The -be in laabe seems to be a morpheme, maybe that's what marks the accusative.
Linguaphile wrote:It sounds as though the lack of a dictionary is an appealing part of the challenge for you, so you may not want this, but there is a good Zapoteco-Spanish dictionary here. I'm assuming you don't know Spanish (there are actually quite a few Spanish loanwords in your sentences below), so to use the dictionary you'd then have to look up the translation of the Spanish that is given. But that's do-able.
I'm going to make some comments below about the words you didn't have, but I'll put them in spoiler tags in case you don't want that info. I know very little grammar though, just some vocab (& Spanish, which helps with using the dictionary and understanding the loanwords).
Karavinka wrote:Sometimes you just can't sleep. And curse you, Turkish, I keep pronouncing /c/ in the Turkish way.
Karavinka wrote:Uca dxi enda riziila'dxi para binni, cadi binni uca para laani.
The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath.
This might be the first sentence fully figured out. dxi enda riziila'dxi repeats multiple times as "Sabbath".
Karavinka wrote:If uca means "was made", this means Zapotec has a morphological passive?
Karavinka wrote:I cannot help thinking that para must be a Spanish loanword. And binni was seen multiple times with unclear meaning, but in comparison with laani, it might be broken down to bin-ni.
Karavinka wrote:Laa in laani needs to be a 3sg pronoun to stand for Sabbath.
That leaves cadi as some form of negative.
Karavinka wrote:Ne laca na Jesús rabi laaca'
And Jesus said unto them
This contrasts to Mark 1:37 on the previous post, where laabe was used. The if the difference between -ca/-be is number, then laa might not be a pronoun at all. Is this something like Hebrew 'immi-'immanu etc?
Karavinka wrote:laa+ni : for it (3sg inanimate)
laa+be : for him (3sg -- unclear whether human or masculine only yet)
laa+ca' : for them
Ti dxi enda riziila'dxi zididi né Jesús ca discípulu sti ndaani ti ñaa.
And it came to pass, that he was going on the sabbath day through the grainfields
This ti seems to be serving multiple functions. The first is most likely a temporal preposition, the second might be relativising. Coincidentally, ti does the same thing in Thai. Ca is another very commonly seen word, here it looks like enumerating "and" or "with."
Karavinka wrote:Xiñee caní' hombre ri sicarí pue.
Why doth this man thus speak?
The word sicarí appears twice in Mark 2, once here and another time "fashion." I'm assuming pue is "this", making sicarí pue "this way = thus." I'm not clear on ri, though it seems to be some kind of definiteness or deixis.
That leaves caní' as the verb: interrog. + V + S + adverbial complements.
Karavinka wrote:But to be honest, I didn't expect anyone on UniLang to actually know any Zapotec and that's why I didn't bother with the disclaimer... Thank you for the information, you didn't spoil much. (That said, I'm not sure if I want to completely forego of the "resources" for Zapotec, because the amount of stuff in general is rather limited. I might decide to use some learner materials along with it.)
linguaphile wrote:"Uca" is a verb meaning "it happened, it came to pass, it was".
Karavinka wrote:linguaphile wrote:"Uca" is a verb meaning "it happened, it came to pass, it was".
You just spoiled a very important major hint (though probably unwittingly) -- the parallel I quoted was an English version as I was looking Zapotec-English, but if that's what uca means in that verse, then Zapotec is translated directly from Greek (the equivalent being ἐγένετο).
Karavinka wrote:Dxi bizulú Dios bizá' guidxilayú ne ibá' maca nuu tobi ni rabi cabe Diidxa', ne uyuu Diidxa que ra nuu Dios, ne Diidxa que Dios laa.
Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1. The lengthy intro that seems to be paraphrasing "in the beginning" initially made me believe it might be a freer translation, but I might want to look at the Greek more often. (Alas I've forgotten too much Greek over time )
Karavinka wrote:But to be honest, I didn't expect anyone on UniLang to actually know any Zapotec and that's why I didn't bother with the disclaimer...
Karavinka wrote:Thank you for your comments Linguaphile, but please don't feel frustrated if I don't seem to be reading what you write under the spoiler section...
Karavinka wrote:Iruti rucaa remiendu tindaa lari cubi lu ti lari yooxho'.
Mark 2:21 No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment.
Karavinka wrote:Dxi bizulú guidxilayú ne ibá' maca nuu né Diidxa que Dios.
John 1:2 He was with God in the beginning.
Karavinka wrote:ne Diidxa que Dios laa.
John 1:1 And the Word was God
I fail to notice an explicit verb in this.
Karavinka wrote:The overabundance of the hispanism que is a bit concerning, as if it's literally saying "and Word, which, God himself."
Karavinka wrote:Loanwords like peru, pur, ramiendu, vinu and Pedru suggests o > u in certain environments.
Linguaphile wrote:Below I'm going to comment on a few of your translations. Where I think your translation is heading down the wrong path, I'll tell you which part, but I won't correct it. In other words I'll tell you what the word doesn't mean but I won't tell you what it means. (Although I can in a later post if you want me to.)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests