Translation of small text into Hawaiian

Moderators: aaakknu, atalarikt

geonames
Posts: 73
Joined: 2008-01-04, 6:00
Real Name: Werner Fröhlich
Gender: male
Location: Düsseldorf
Country: DE Germany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Translation of small text into Hawaiian

Postby geonames » 2009-04-04, 17:33

Hi all,

I'm running a website about (mostly) geographical names in several languages ( http://www.geonames.de ) and am looking for a translation of the introduction phrase into Hawaiian:

"The countries of the world in their own languages and scripts; with official names, capitals, flags, coats of arms, administrative divisions, national anthems, and translations of the countries and capitals into many languages"

Thank you all in advance and enjoy your weekend, or what's left of it.
Werner
my website: http://www.geonames.de
Gib mir die Kraft Dinge zu ändern, die ich ändern kann; die Gelassenheit Dinge zu akzeptieren, die ich nicht ändern kann; und die Weisheit den Unterschied zu erkennen.

Kalani
Posts: 12
Joined: 2008-03-25, 4:52
Gender: male
Location: Waipi'o
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Kalani » 2009-04-14, 2:18

I'll attempt this.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i ko lākou mau ʻōlelo a me kākau maoli; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala i kekahi mau ʻōlelo

User avatar
ILuvEire
Posts: 10398
Joined: 2007-12-08, 17:41
Gender: male
Location: Austin
Country: US United States (United States)
Contact:

Re: Translation of small text

Postby ILuvEire » 2009-04-14, 2:48

Lol, that's much better than what I could have done.
[flag]de[/flag] [flag]da[/flag] [flag]fr-qc[/flag] [flag]haw[/flag] [flag]he[/flag] [flag]es[/flag]
Current focus: [flag]ga[/flag] [flag]ar[/flag]
Facebook | tumblr | Twitter
“We need to make books cool again. If you go home with somebody and they don't have books, don't fuck them.” —John Waters

geonames
Posts: 73
Joined: 2008-01-04, 6:00
Real Name: Werner Fröhlich
Gender: male
Location: Düsseldorf
Country: DE Germany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: Translation of small text

Postby geonames » 2009-04-14, 4:10

Thank you very much!
my website: http://www.geonames.de
Gib mir die Kraft Dinge zu ändern, die ich ändern kann; die Gelassenheit Dinge zu akzeptieren, die ich nicht ändern kann; und die Weisheit den Unterschied zu erkennen.

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2009-04-20, 23:58

Kalani wrote:I'll attempt this.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i ko lākou mau ʻōlelo a me kākau maoli; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala i kekahi mau ʻōlelo


This is a very good translation. I would suggest just a couple of changes.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i lākou mau ʻōlelo a palapala; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala ma nā ʻōlelo he nui.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

geonames
Posts: 73
Joined: 2008-01-04, 6:00
Real Name: Werner Fröhlich
Gender: male
Location: Düsseldorf
Country: DE Germany (Deutschland)
Contact:

Re: Translation of small text

Postby geonames » 2009-04-21, 0:18

Thank you very much for the correction!
my website: http://www.geonames.de
Gib mir die Kraft Dinge zu ändern, die ich ändern kann; die Gelassenheit Dinge zu akzeptieren, die ich nicht ändern kann; und die Weisheit den Unterschied zu erkennen.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2009-12-24, 16:06

kahihi'o wrote:
Kalani wrote:I'll attempt this.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i ko lākou mau ʻōlelo a me kākau maoli; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala i kekahi mau ʻōlelo


This is a very good translation. I would suggest just a couple of changes.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i lākou mau ʻōlelo a palapala; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala ma nā ʻōlelo he nui.


He aha la ke kumu no ? Oi aku ke ko i . Me ka pepeke aike he ma muli o ka pepeke, aole loa.
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-01-09, 8:51

Nohola wrote:
kahihi'o wrote:
Kalani wrote:I'll attempt this.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i ko lākou mau ʻōlelo a me kākau maoli; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala i kekahi mau ʻōlelo


This is a very good translation. I would suggest just a couple of changes.

Nā ʻāina o ka honua i lākou mau ʻōlelo a palapala; me nā inoa kūhelu, nā kapikala, nā hae, nā hōʻailona no ke kūlana, nā aupuni kiwikā, nā mele aupuni, a me nā unuhina o nā ʻāina me nā kapikala ma nā ʻōlelo he nui.


He aha la ke kumu no ? Oi aku ke ko i . Me ka pepeke aike he ma muli o ka pepeke, aole loa.


ʻŌlelo typically takes a-possession when the possessor is animate in the mind of the speaker (e.g., Ua aha ʻia akula kā kākou ʻōlelo?). However, I concede that the o-possessive would be better in this situation. As for your second question, "he nui" is actually very commonly used to modify nouns with the intended meaning of "many." I'm surprised that you are unfamiliar with it. The following are several examples for instructive purposes:

1. Ma mua o ka Māhele Nui o ka MH 1848, ua lilo iā ia nā 'āina he nui loa ma kona 'ao'ao he ali'i 'ōpio.
2. He mea kupanaha ka loa‘a ‘ana o ka heluhelu i nā palapala a me ke kākau lima i ka po‘e ‘elemākule a me nā luāhine i loa‘a nā makahiki he nui, a ua pohihihi ke a‘o ‘ana i nā hua o ke alaka‘i mua i ka ‘ike.
3. He mau waiwai hou loa ko mākou, i loa‘a mai nei mai ka hikina mai, ‘o nā ‘ano like ‘ole he nui wale
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-01-09, 20:10

kahihi'o wrote:
As for your second question, "he nui" is actually very commonly used to modify nouns with the intended meaning of "many." I'm surprised that you are unfamiliar with it.


I have seen "he nui" used but not the way that you suggested. I guess it could be used that way but for me, at least for those of us who don't necessarily habitually translate English to Hawaiian, I guess it is okay. But given that the English was "...into many languages", I think kalani's translation was acceptable unless one literally translated the context of how "mau" was used to only mean "some" as in a specific, quantitive definition, then I can understand why they wouldn't want to accept a translation such as the one mentioned by kalani.

For me, I guess because I'm coming from an environment where there are speakers of so many languages and a demand for using these people particularly in the legal field for interpretation where there is no time to question the percentage of literal or loose interpretation/translation, it is vital to get the true idea conveyed rather trying to gauge what is more appropriate or acceptable based on grammatical rules that has actually changed somewhat over the past 2 centuries.

But please understand that not everyone went to schools on O'ahu or Hawai'i island to learn Hawaiian. Some of us were fortunate to learn it in the 1970's or even even earlier, INFORMALLY & directly from ko makou mau kupuna the natural way. That means, we never had any formal classes, especially back in those days and moreso if you come from a community whose economy isn't as progressive unlike in larger cities.

Besides, it wasn't until the early 1990 or 1991 did I learn the grammar breakdown of our language. And with that I had to relearn the current spelling which changed even during my childhood days. Now I see that the immersion schools, particularly the model imposed by UH Hilo has devised a model to place a non-western perspective to understanding a non-Indo-European language. Although I am fully aware of the immersion schools on our island teaching as much of the local vernacular to our children, and have made other speakers aware of dialectal differences on other islands such as on Kauai & Niihau, unfortunately not enough of these cultural & dialectal differences have been taught to the second language speakers of Hawaiian at the college level. Some may like to believe that they have, but obviously it wasn't enough.

I have personally witnessed the younger generations criticize the speech of na kupuna & even vice versa. In the end, it becomes nothing more than a battle of who is better at speaking the language. All tools successful in our downfall as a people & implemented on purpose back in the 19th century, and from what we've all witnessed was nearly successful but things change although these things that I mentioned are nothing more but remnants of that type of colonialism still being used.

Fortunately I've known it to happen only on one island which leads me to believe that their goal is simply to increase the number of speakers sans stressing important cultural & regional differences that makes us as a people an entire whole.

Perhaps the bridging of that gap could start here as we kuka in a traditional way versus solely imposing western/haole ways where stress is on individualism & involves impressing others with how much or what one knows. Making assumptions of what others really know without really knowing or having the belief that we all learn from the same source should not cross a person's mind if one is a kamaaina trying to learn the Hawaiian language. But this is not the area to debate one's skill level, intellect or knowledge in the language. If there's anyone who could attest to this, it's the person who created this specific forum (Mamo), who later apologized to me for his arrogance. I was just thankful he realized how I was merely stressing teaching cultural importance along with the language as our Maori cousin riki here has witnessed and totally agreed. This I learned from my Spanish teacher where she actually mentioned that the death of the language meant death of a culture. But the actual sentiments of cultural importance was mentioned by both my Italian teacher & Portuguese tutors.

We have a saying, i Hikauhi, i Kaumanana, which we almost use liberally. But maybe a more accurate saying for this instance should be aohe pau ka ike i ka halau hookahi, we can learn from one another, there's not just one way nor one specific speech.
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-01-10, 1:23

The pattern I described is not one that I originally believed to be confined to speakers who learned Hawaiian in the classroom, and it is not one that I initially grouped of with the rarer sentence patterns. I recall having encountered it in speaking with native speakers, second language speakers, and reading literature. Given that you've been speaking Hawaiian since you learned it in the 1970s, you should have had several years more exposure to the language than I. It was only because of this that I was surprised that you have never encountered it. Could it be that this particular pattern is not quite as common as I believe it to be? This wouldn't be the first time. Perhaps many patterns are now being used regularly among second language speakers, while they were sparsely used among mānaleo. My memory may be betraying me in regards to how often this pattern was really used among the native speakers I spoke with.

Because the translation called for "many languages," I would have argued that "nā ʻōlelo he nui" is much more appropriate than "kekahi mau ʻōlelo." While the former has the effect of meaning many (a lot) of languages, my understanding is that the latter implies only that we are speaking about more than one. Perhaps I am wrong in this department.

For such a small unvisited forum, there appears to be a preponderance of conflict between the forums users: Mamo, Boki, Riki, you, and now myself. It's probably one of the biggest reasons that this forum has remained stagnant for three years. Perhaps Mamo and the rest were disillusioned with all this infighting. Each of the characters on this forum appear to have had their own agendas: Mamo with his intention to start a language forum by any means, Boki with his conspiracy theories, and you with your intention to keep the Hawaiian language as authentic as possible. You appear to have a clearer idea than I in what direction we need to take. We need to learn from each other. I have a lot that I can learn from each of you.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-01-10, 8:42

kahihi'o wrote:The pattern I described is not one that I originally believed to be confined to speakers who learned Hawaiian in the classroom, and it is not one that I initially grouped of with the rarer sentence patterns. I recall having encountered it in speaking with native speakers, second language speakers, and reading literature. Given that you've been speaking Hawaiian since you learned it in the 1970s, you should have had several years more exposure to the language than I. It was only because of this that I was surprised that you have never encountered it.

Did you mean that you expect/assume older manaleo and/or ka poe Niihau to have had the opportunity to mingle among all people of ko Hawaii Pae Aina? I know for a fact that the kupuna I learned from did not have that type of opportunity to mingle with the type of speakers I have nor I did have the opportunity to mingle with the type of kupuna she has, definitely she hasn't had the opportunity to speak to today's younger generation speakers from various islands.

kahihi'o wrote: Could it be that this particular pattern is not quite as common as I believe it to be?

I wouldn't say that this is not common, but rather what I had said in my previous post. Let me reiterate what was said in my previous post and put it in simpler terms. Don't assume that you've encountered all type of speakers. Don't assume that everyone speak the same. Most importantly don't assume that there can only be one way to express an idea. That's what my point was before and it is still now.


kahihi'o wrote:This wouldn't be the first time. Perhaps many patterns are now being used regularly among second language speakers, while they were sparsely used among mānaleo. My memory may be betraying me in regards to how often this pattern was really used among the native speakers I spoke with.

Actually, I've experienced this. A few years ago I was arguing with someone about a particular pattern and his use of "maopopo". I told him of how I learned it and he stressed how it wasn't the case because of how he learned it as well. It wasn't until a couple of years ago I read of Keao NeSmith's thesis did I realize how the language has changed. In fact he pointed out what I was told by other language buffs, something I overlooked which is how a language does not necessarily remain stagnant. Then having given thought to this, I distinctly recall a few instances of word choices alone that have come and gone, just as orthography has changed.

My kupuna apparently still refuses to use the Hawaiianized word for bank and prefer to use just "bank" which is no different than me using words in its true form rather than use the Hawaiianized form. Or how with the advancing technology that "kamepiula" have replaced the older term in order to accomodate all related computer terminology, or even the word for hospital. I have gradually seen how "hapenuia" is being used more and more. All of these are typical examples and should be taken into consideration and it only stresses what I said before, that there is not one way to say things. Again, being exposed to various language speakers who work in the field of interpretation, I know this to be true.

kahihi'o wrote:Because the translation called for "many languages," I would have argued that "nā ʻōlelo he nui" is much more appropriate than "kekahi mau ʻōlelo." While the former has the effect of meaning many (a lot) of languages, my understanding is that the latter implies only that we are speaking about more than one. Perhaps I am wrong in this department.

Let me ask you this, does "kekahi mau olelo" translate to "one language" to you? I think that's what I should have asked rather than say that kalani wasn't really saying "many", and that his version was not specific but the idea was there, which is why I mentioned too literal versus too loose of an interpretation. I guess if people here wanted only literal translations, then I can understand but this goes exactly back to the arguments I've made with Mamo where sometimes cultural aspects are vital to second language speakers such as yourself.


kahihi'o wrote:For such a small unvisited forum, there appears to be a preponderance of conflict between the forums users: Mamo, Boki, Riki, you, and now myself. It's probably one of the biggest reasons that this forum has remained stagnant for three years. Perhaps Mamo and the rest were disillusioned with all this infighting.

Have you spoken to Mamo, Boki and Riki before? Although I wouldn't make those type of assumptions as to the reasons why the forum has been stagnant but I've also frequented other forums here on unilang and I could surmise that a lot has to do with its popularity or number of speakers and importance in today's global market. I've definitely seen this with other minor European languages.

I know that even in my days in school, the languages that were popular and being taught in school were Japanese, French and much later they had Spanish and Hawaiian about the same time. I'm referring to a small school of a student body of approximately 600 from 7th to 12th grade. I can imagine how that may have been slightly different for larger schools on the more popular islands.

My point is that although in the Hawaiian islands alone the Hawaiian language is more popular today than it was more than 20 years ago, but the ratio of English speakers currently occupying the islands compared to those that speak Hawaiian at any level mirrors that of unilang, or rather vice versa.

kahihi'o wrote:Each of the characters on this forum appear to have had their own agendas: Mamo with his intention to start a language forum by any means, Boki with his conspiracy theories, and you with your intention to keep the Hawaiian language as authentic as possible. You appear to have a clearer idea than I in what direction we need to take.

It's not that I have a clearer idea what direction we need to take. This isn't about one person having all the answers and everyone else needs to follow. No, that's not what I have been saying since the beginning.

Word choices such as "authentic" is what gets people in trouble. I know many people have a hard time accepting this, but what may seem "authentic" to me does not mean it is authentic to you or anyone else from O'ahu or Hawai'i island. That's because there are differences in the way that we speak and we should be aware of that regardless of how many years of exposure one has or to how many manaleo they've been exposed to because each of us have different experiences.

I felt that cultural aspects should be taken into consideration. This as I've said is echoed with many professors who teach foreign languages. It is vital that upon learning a foreign language, one should be educated of the culture. You cannot learn the language without the culture.

I certainly can understand the need to translate English into Hawaiian for whatever reason, but not stressing certainly cultural aspects which in many times does not have literal meanings in Hawaiian could lead to the argument we've been having about the use of "he" in that context. Cultural aspects will allow second language learners to know of various subtleties from island to island, place to place and now even generation to generation. I always see many hoailona and realized I probably been having one just before you replied, I was going through Fornander's book (vol. VI) where he listed quite a number of words used on Kauai & Niihau compared to the standard Hawaiian many people know. I have seen this passage before but the other day it made me realize that his list seemed pretty extensive compared to what I recall reading in Elbert & Pukui's book, even Cleeland's book.

kahihi'o wrote:We need to learn from each other. I have a lot that I can learn from each of you.

I've always had this mentality and definitely agree, hence the reason for that olelo noeau. We all can benefit from each other. I've always been against the whole "learn my way or no way...there can only be one way" or nazi method, particularly because it was in the late 1980s when I began experiencing variations of speakers. I learned very quickly that what I had learned was not the only way to express things and that other manaleo and 2nd language speakers didn't necessarily learn the way that I have. And that there are dialectal differences and everyone else should be made aware of there existance.

Sure we can argue till we are blue in the face about translation, too literal or not, but let's face it, we're not diplomats, UN workers or FBI so this really isn't about how much we know and how close we come to the actual translation and when it is more appropriate to do so. But being cautious and open minded to dialectal differences is definitely important and has always been my message since the beginning. There is no one way to speak Hawaiian.
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-01-10, 9:44

I wouldn't expect elderly people who learned Hawaiian three quarters of a century ago to be aware of all sentence patterns. However, I would expect those who learned it in a school setting, dedicated time to studying the language formally, and were familiar with newly coined grammatical terms (e.g., pepeke ʻaike he) to have seen this pattern.

Correct, "kekahi mau ʻōlelo" doesn't read as "one language" to me. The mau indicates that the languages are indeed plural.

I have not spoken with the aforementioned users, but I have read their exchanges on this forum. The disgruntled arguments between them suggest that this forum was a place riddled with conflict. There was a decent amount of interest in this forum when it opened in 2006. Activity here has slowed down considerably since then.

I agree that it is very presumptuous to conclude that there is only one correct way of speaking Hawaiian. I have had the experience of younger persons who learned Hawaiian in schools claiming that certain phrases spoken by mānaleo are incorrect. In my opinion, the kinds of Hawaiian spoken by mānaleo are much more authentic than those spoken by us second language speakers. On the other hand, speaking Hawaiian at all is much more preferable than not speaking it at all.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-01-10, 10:20

kahihi'o wrote:I wouldn't expect elderly people who learned Hawaiian three quarters of a century ago to be aware of all sentence patterns. However, I would expect those who learned it in a school setting, dedicated time to studying the language formally, and were familiar with newly coined grammatical terms (e.g., pepeke ʻaike he) to have seen this pattern.

Understood. However, even I don't make that type of assumption, expecting learned speakers to know all the dialects, that they all learned the same way and that all schools teach the same way throughout the entire island archipelago, attest that their way is correct and assume that everyone else has seen what they've seen. But rather, it's important to just be open to the idea that there will be differences and that one way certainly isn't necessarily correct over another.

A good example is when I hear people say "if I was....". It sounds natural, but grammatically it isn't correct. People can argue about what is or isn't correct. Of course if one understood the subjunctive mood, they would understand that in the preterite subjunctive the conjugation of the verb "to be", the 1st person singular uses "were", not "was". But because it is so commonly used in many people's speech (not limited to American boundries) it has become the norm, one of those changes that has occurred throughout time becoming the accepted or colloquial form among the common people in ordinary instances.

British speakers also use "was", but it would be very ignorant for me to say that these people who use the incorrect form should have learned the correct form and/or should've have come across it in text. That would be of course assuming that they know how to read beyond a 2nd grade level provided that they're not from some economically deprived community.

kahihi'o wrote:Correct, "kekahi mau ʻōlelo" doesn't read as "one language" to me. The mau indicates that the languages are indeed plural.

This was the only reason why I stated that kalani's way was not incorrect but can understand why you felt your way was more precise, which goes back to very literal versus too loose of a translation.

kahihi'o wrote:I have not spoken with the aforementioned users, but I have read their exchanges on this forum. The disgruntled arguments between them suggest that this forum was a place riddled with conflict. There was a decent amount of interest in this forum when it opened in 2006. Activity here has slowed down considerably since then.

Other than the active members that you've mentioned, I haven't seen anyone else who were not afraid to voice their opinion. Perhaps it is that type of environment and the lack of passiveness as you suggested that scared others away, particularly for language learners which I can understand. That only makes it problematic for timid people or those who are humble about learning another language.

Of course it doesn't help that I was brought up in an environment where passivity is discouraged. This is evident in the community I come from. Don't get me wrong, there is a fine line between that versus humility, just as how many youth of today has learned to be accostumed to privileges that fosters audaciousness rather than humility.

But going back to speaking out, it is an aspect valued in my working environment, but that's just my opinion as far as it being valued. Most people in my working environment would think it is unheard of to not be more aggressive when it comes to expressing one's thoughts because it is necessary in our environment. Of course this is exactly different for locals, which is a good reason why I try to educate people on doing business in Hawaii versus the mainland, because it goes back to my all time favorite - CULTURAL AWARENESS. These are vital aspects in a successful business, just as it is in learning the language which is a cultural aspect.

kahihi'o wrote:I agree that it is very presumptuous to conclude that there is only one correct way of speaking Hawaiian. I have had the experience of younger persons who learned Hawaiian in schools claiming that certain phrases spoken by mānaleo are incorrect. In my opinion, the kinds of Hawaiian spoken by mānaleo are much more authentic than those spoken by us second language speakers.

This certainly has been my experience and was very shocked. But I've also noticed how "English" some of the newer speakers' speech has become, which I assume is definitely influenced from thinking from English rather than having a Hawaiian thought.

kahihi'o wrote: On the other hand, speaking Hawaiian at all is much more preferable than not speaking it at all.

I certainly can understand this. I'm sure we all could. I personally have witnessed demise and a comeback within my own family as far as speakers of the language is concerned, to a point where I have family members who are now a part of the immersion/education system. Where one kupuna died out and not pass on the speech of where she was from, another kupuna has given me the privilege of learning the speech of her kupuna and of the area we are from.

This we see even with pronunciation of the language. And I'm not referring to the use of K versus T, but even beyond that. I can hear the same with Maori speakers too with their vowels, just as I've noticed it with Hawaiian with the consonants and also diphthongs.

I think what becomes the real question is trying to define what is too much of a change, how much should we consider as acceptable change in the language whether it is orthography that could shape or reshape its pronunciation (like w/ the disuse of T), syntax (influenced by grammar) or even word choice. I mean we could just speak Hawaiian as you said, rather than not, but there has to be some type of boundries. But like I said, how much should be considered too much or too little. Too lenient, one could be accused of being incorrect or thought to be stupid or having assumptions being made on them that there are things they should have known based on the other person's perception of what they define the rules to be. Too strict, one could easily be seen as pushing authenticity beyond what they define as being resonable. So where does it end?
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-02-07, 14:21

Nohola wrote:
kahihi'o wrote:I wouldn't expect elderly people who learned Hawaiian three quarters of a century ago to be aware of all sentence patterns. However, I would expect those who learned it in a school setting, dedicated time to studying the language formally, and were familiar with newly coined grammatical terms (e.g., pepeke ʻaike he) to have seen this pattern.

Understood. However, even I don't make that type of assumption, expecting learned speakers to know all the dialects, that they all learned the same way and that all schools teach the same way throughout the entire island archipelago, attest that their way is correct and assume that everyone else has seen what they've seen. But rather, it's important to just be open to the idea that there will be differences and that one way certainly isn't necessarily correct over another.

A good example is when I hear people say "if I was....". It sounds natural, but grammatically it isn't correct. People can argue about what is or isn't correct. Of course if one understood the subjunctive mood, they would understand that in the preterite subjunctive the conjugation of the verb "to be", the 1st person singular uses "were", not "was". But because it is so commonly used in many people's speech (not limited to American boundries) it has become the norm, one of those changes that has occurred throughout time becoming the accepted or colloquial form among the common people in ordinary instances.

British speakers also use "was", but it would be very ignorant for me to say that these people who use the incorrect form should have learned the correct form and/or should've have come across it in text. That would be of course assuming that they know how to read beyond a 2nd grade level provided that they're not from some economically deprived community.


I agree. I've yet to take the position that one form of speaking Hawaiian is incorrect over another. Dialectal differences that emerge through the use of the language are fine in my opinion. The only variations I would question are those that are the product of beginner mistakes. For example, profound grammatical errors such as appending "nā" to demonstratives, possessive pronouns, and indefinite articles in an attempt at affecting a plural, rather than adding mau or poʻe, or even using k-deletion in possessive pronouns as is done in NZ Māori and Sāmoan (although to a much greater extant than merely possessive pronouns), as examples. Genuine sound changes (e.g., k<->T, l<->n), vocabulary differences (e.g., pelehū VS pōkeokeo), movement of directionals to after the gerund in nominative sentences (e.g., ka hele ʻana aku VS ka hele aku ʻana), and other kinds of differences that exist among Hawaiian speakers offer much more color than would be provided by declaring a single, perhaps mechanistic, 'my way or the highway' version of the language.

kahihi'o wrote:Correct, "kekahi mau ʻōlelo" doesn't read as "one language" to me. The mau indicates that the languages are indeed plural.

This was the only reason why I stated that kalani's way was not incorrect but can understand why you felt your way was more precise, which goes back to very literal versus too loose of a translation.


Indeed. The translation called for "many languages," meaning a great number of languages. "Kekahi mau ʻōlelo" gives the effect that there is only at least more than one language being described. Instead, "nā ʻōlelo he nui" (analula: determiner + noun + he nui) makes use of an acceptable sentence pattern fitting the requirement of implying that we are speaking about a good quantity of languages.

kahihi'o wrote:I have not spoken with the aforementioned users, but I have read their exchanges on this forum. The disgruntled arguments between them suggest that this forum was a place riddled with conflict. There was a decent amount of interest in this forum when it opened in 2006. Activity here has slowed down considerably since then.

Other than the active members that you've mentioned, I haven't seen anyone else who were not afraid to voice their opinion. Perhaps it is that type of environment and the lack of passiveness as you suggested that scared others away, particularly for language learners which I can understand. That only makes it problematic for timid people or those who are humble about learning another language.

Of course it doesn't help that I was brought up in an environment where passivity is discouraged. This is evident in the community I come from. Don't get me wrong, there is a fine line between that versus humility, just as how many youth of today has learned to be accostumed to privileges that fosters audaciousness rather than humility.

But going back to speaking out, it is an aspect valued in my working environment, but that's just my opinion as far as it being valued. Most people in my working environment would think it is unheard of to not be more aggressive when it comes to expressing one's thoughts because it is necessary in our environment. Of course this is exactly different for locals, which is a good reason why I try to educate people on doing business in Hawaii versus the mainland, because it goes back to my all time favorite - CULTURAL AWARENESS. These are vital aspects in a successful business, just as it is in learning the language which is a cultural aspect.


This was, and should be, a language learning environment. An environment marked by infighting between the most contributing members of the forum: Mamo, riki, you, and perhaps the conspiracy theorists (i.e., Boti, the Manu, Atamaʻi Aliʻi, etc.) had rendered this forum non-conducive to actual language learning. Not that debates don't prove fruitful in exploring multiple perspectives into a given topic, but when the majority of board activity among these members is dedicated to protests and arguments, the environment is no longer suited to attract those interested in learning the language and providing them with the aid they need to actually start speaking it, and this was supposed to be the purpose of this forum.

kahihi'o wrote: On the other hand, speaking Hawaiian at all is much more preferable than not speaking it at all.

I certainly can understand this. I'm sure we all could. I personally have witnessed demise and a comeback within my own family as far as speakers of the language is concerned, to a point where I have family members who are now a part of the immersion/education system. Where one kupuna died out and not pass on the speech of where she was from, another kupuna has given me the privilege of learning the speech of her kupuna and of the area we are from.

This we see even with pronunciation of the language. And I'm not referring to the use of K versus T, but even beyond that. I can hear the same with Maori speakers too with their vowels, just as I've noticed it with Hawaiian with the consonants and also diphthongs.

I think what becomes the real question is trying to define what is too much of a change, how much should we consider as acceptable change in the language whether it is orthography that could shape or reshape its pronunciation (like w/ the disuse of T), syntax (influenced by grammar) or even word choice. I mean we could just speak Hawaiian as you said, rather than not, but there has to be some type of boundries. But like I said, how much should be considered too much or too little. Too lenient, one could be accused of being incorrect or thought to be stupid or having assumptions being made on them that there are things they should have known based on the other person's perception of what they define the rules to be. Too strict, one could easily be seen as pushing authenticity beyond what they define as being resonable. So where does it end?


The simplest answer I can offer is that Hawaiian language learners need to expect that there are multiple ways of speaking Hawaiian, and that they should learn as many of these ways as possible. Most of the patterns and vocabulary I have in my mental repository are the product of my own endeavors into researching multiple Hawaiian grammar books (I've read at least four grammar books along with thesis papers), multiple pieces of Hawaiian language literature, new and old Hawaiian language newspaper articles, audio and video with mānaleo, and genuine communication with native speakers. We are the product of what we have access to. And I'm still learning. I would not presume that all speakers should know all the possible patterns and vocabulary that exist, as I know that I don't. I likely expected that this particular pattern would be as familiar to speakers as something as simple as E verb Ana, as he nui appended to the end of the noun is quite used, at least nowadays where I live, and is present in multiple pieces of literature from the 19th century written by Mānaleo.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-02-07, 17:01

kahihi'o wrote:I agree. I've yet to take the position that one form of speaking Hawaiian is incorrect over another. Dialectal differences that emerge through the use of the language are fine in my opinion. The only variations I would question are those that are the product of beginner mistakes. For example, profound grammatical errors such as appending "nā" to demonstratives, possessive pronouns, and indefinite articles in an attempt at affecting a plural, rather than adding mau or poʻe, or even using k-deletion in possessive pronouns as is done in NZ Māori and Sāmoan (although to a much greater extant than merely possessive pronouns), as examples.

Interesting, I personally never saw any of that happening. But then again, I'm not exposed to beginners who learned it at the University of Hawaii.

kahihi'o wrote:Genuine sound changes (e.g., k<->T, l<->n), vocabulary differences (e.g., pelehū VS pōkeokeo), movement of directionals to after the gerund in nominative sentences (e.g., ka hele ʻana aku VS ka hele aku ʻana), and other kinds of differences that exist among Hawaiian speakers offer much more color than would be provided by declaring a single, perhaps mechanistic, 'my way or the highway' version of the language.

Agreed.

kahihi'o wrote:This was, and should be, a language learning environment. An environment marked by infighting between the most contributing members of the forum: Mamo, riki, you, and perhaps the conspiracy theorists (i.e., Boti, the Manu, Atamaʻi Aliʻi, etc.) had rendered this forum non-conducive to actual language learning.

This goes back to what I mentioned about learning the culture. These are essential to language learning. Perhaps what may be construed as infighting by some while others may consider it the norm (think of any corporation with their various levels of executives resolving a solution that works best for all) , but although maybe we can curtail that to a certain point, many of those issues debated really has to do with the language.

I can't remember exactly which topic off hand it was in this forum, but the same topics have recently appeared recently in another forum that I frequent, not a language forum, but a forum for Kanaka Oiwi. But the original poster posted it because he is learning the language. Prior to that poster posting, someone else posted something similar, if not the exact same thing basically, and I think that was done about a year ago but that thread enlivens every so often by someone responding. So as I said, they are essential, or maybe I should say someone will definitely bring it up eventually. Because that's part of the language. Pronunciation, usage, speakers, grammar, semantics, syntax, orthography, etc., they're all part of language learning and acquisition and any debate really could come out of it.

kahihi'o wrote:Not that debates don't prove fruitful in exploring multiple perspectives into a given topic, but when the majority of board activity among these members is dedicated to protests and arguments, the environment is no longer suited to attract those interested in learning the language and providing them with the aid they need to actually start speaking it, and this was supposed to be the purpose of this forum.

But if you really looked carefully at all of the topics, rather than some, there were fruitful, non-controversial or "safe" topics as well. Definitely cannot agree that the environment is no longer suited to attract those interested in learning the language. Aside from this site, I've been frequenting various language boards, on myspace, livejournal, orkut, facebook, most importantly foreign ones as well. The forums reflects everyday life on the internet where you do have your trolls, your pseudo-intellectuals and those that are really intelligent, the passives and the contributors. This is what you would normally see outside in the real world. And in my own experience (not limited to this forum), people are still attracted. Perhaps there will be some who may be detered, but we all know that most people don't find these forums to learn the language and is not the best source as far as learning is concerned. In fact, a friend of mine pointed me back into another forum since a woman was asking for online sources for learning Hawaiian. She knew of a few, and of course this forum was the last thing on my mind. I definitely forgot about this forum until I noticed an update this morning.

I'm not saying it's bad, nor good, but rather this is not one of the main sources and, as we all know, is frequented by mainly language aficionados. In fact, I only frequent this particular forum, although my interest lies with Portuguese, I rarely go to that forum, for the reason that it's geared towards people who ask the pertinent, grammatical questions which they feel needs to be explained from an American/Western/English-speaking point of view.

In other words, I can see how you may think the controversial topics may have made people less likely to be attracted, but I've seen other Polynesian forums here managed by riki and the traffic flow isn't as great either, not because there were controversial topics, but for the same reason why there isn't a lot of flow in this forum. It's just not a popular language.

kahihi'o wrote:
The simplest answer I can offer is that Hawaiian language learners need to expect that there are multiple ways of speaking Hawaiian, and that they should learn as many of these ways as possible.

Well said!

kahihi'o wrote:Most of the patterns and vocabulary I have in my mental repository are the product of my own endeavors into researching multiple Hawaiian grammar books (I've read at least four grammar books along with thesis papers), multiple pieces of Hawaiian language literature, new and old Hawaiian language newspaper articles, audio and video with mānaleo, and genuine communication with native speakers. We are the product of what we have access to. And I'm still learning. I would not presume that all speakers should know all the possible patterns and vocabulary that exist, as I know that I don't. I likely expected that this particular pattern would be as familiar to speakers as something as simple as E verb Ana, as he nui appended to the end of the noun is quite used, at least nowadays where I live, and is present in multiple pieces of literature from the 19th century written by Mānaleo.

And that is what's important kahihio. I too am a product of what I had access to. That doesn't mean that I'm wrong. And the one kupuna I learned from still lives, she's kicking strong, has grandchildren who graduated from Kula Kaiapuni, etc. But now I'm thinking, probably they too are a product of what they had access to and that's through kula kaiapuni from our local area versus learning it from their own kupuna like I did. In fact, this kupuna that I speak of, they have recordings of her parents at the Bishop Museum. I meant to listen to it to see if I notice anything unusual, or anything different from what I learned. But both she and another kupuna we learned Hawaiian from used books that , if you ask me, pretty crappy in my opinion, but they reflect the speakers of that time the books were written. They only used it to explain grammatical features of which were never ingrained by the way. That I had to learn on my own much later as I learned other languages. Other than that, it was the old fashion way, listen, repeat, apply.

And the beauty about all of this is that we never stop learning. People think they learn, and that's it. But that's not how it works. I've heard the same, exact thing from many people who learned 2nd or 3rd, etc. languages. My Brazilian friend tells me all the time, about her learning English in Brazil, yet she's been in the US for about 4 years, as confident as she seems to be, she still learns things of the language. While my Salvadorian friend has been in the US for 22 - 23 years, he too isn't aware of many minute, details that occurs in the language, whether it is pronunciation, grammar (who does really), vocabulary or usage. Even for native speakers, we continue to learn our own first language, as much of a good command we may have of it, that doesn't mean we stop learning it.
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-02-07, 23:12

Sorry, I have to amend what I wrote about k-deletion in possessive pronouns. I wrote,

Profound grammatical errors such as ... using k-deletion in possessive pronouns as is done in NZ Māori and Sāmoan ...


K-deletion is used perhaps rarely to show a plural (e.g., E nānā mai i ou mau pōkiʻi VS E nānā mai i kou mau pōkiʻi). What I meant is that using k-deletion outside of possessive pronouns to create plurals is not grammatical in Hawaiian. It hasn't seemed to carry over into other determiners such as demonstratives.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-02-08, 0:09

kahihi'o wrote:Sorry, I have to amend what I wrote about k-deletion in possessive pronouns. I wrote,

Profound grammatical errors such as ... using k-deletion in possessive pronouns as is done in NZ Māori and Sāmoan ...


K-deletion is used perhaps rarely to show a plural (e.g., E nānā mai i ou mau pōkiʻi VS E nānā mai i kou mau pōkiʻi). What I meant is that using k-deletion outside of possessive pronouns to create plurals is not grammatical in Hawaiian. It hasn't seemed to carry over into other determiners such as demonstratives.

I've never seen the k-deletion (is that what the exact term was called? I knew it as k-possessives {vs. k-deletion to the non-K possessives} but not sure if that was the linguistic acceptable term, if there is such a thing. But didn't think that one could mark the plural with the k-deletions, or actually that they have been. Seems odd, to me that is. I'm not judging, which is why I brought up my opinion in the first place. :)
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-02-08, 9:56

Nohola wrote:
kahihi'o wrote:Sorry, I have to amend what I wrote about k-deletion in possessive pronouns. I wrote,

Profound grammatical errors such as ... using k-deletion in possessive pronouns as is done in NZ Māori and Sāmoan ...


K-deletion is used perhaps rarely to show a plural (e.g., E nānā mai i ou mau pōkiʻi VS E nānā mai i kou mau pōkiʻi). What I meant is that using k-deletion outside of possessive pronouns to create plurals is not grammatical in Hawaiian. It hasn't seemed to carry over into other determiners such as demonstratives.

I've never seen the k-deletion (is that what the exact term was called? I knew it as k-possessives {vs. k-deletion to the non-K possessives} but not sure if that was the linguistic acceptable term, if there is such a thing. But didn't think that one could mark the plural with the k-deletions, or actually that they have been. Seems odd, to me that is. I'm not judging, which is why I brought up my opinion in the first place. :)


K-deletion is the omission of the k- from k-possessives. I'm not sure if we use that term in Hawaiian grammar, but other languages, such as Māori, have what is called t-deletion. The K in possessives and demonstratives comes from the singular/definite article ke/ka. The same goes for the T in Māori (definite article te), the L in Sāmoan (definite article le), and I believe the H/E in Tongan (definite article he/e). In Hawaiian, by removing the K we can make the possessives plural.

This is now rarely done in Hawaiian, and I haven't read anything showing that this occurs beyond possessive pronouns in our language. The only examples I have encountered appear in literature. The example I gave in a post above comes from Lāʻieikawai.

In Māori, however, you can have words such as ēnā (from tēnā), ērā (from tērā), ōku (from tōku), etc.
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

kahihi'o
Posts: 62
Joined: 2009-04-20, 9:57
Country: US United States (United States)

Re: Translation of small text

Postby kahihi'o » 2010-02-21, 10:54

On an interesting note, the possessive pronouns in Tongan are very illustrative of possessive pronoun formation. Here are a few articles: He/E (definite article), Ha (indefinite article), Siʻi (emotional definite article), Siʻa (emotional indefinite article).

The following are forms equivalent to 'my.'
Heʻeku - definite
Haʻaku - indefinite
Siʻeku - emotional definite
Siʻaku - emotional indefinite
I nui ke aho a moe i ke kai, no ke kai kā hoʻi ua ʻāina.

User avatar
Nohola
Posts: 79
Joined: 2006-08-22, 20:49
Real Name: Kalani
Gender: male
Location: Kuaihelani

Re: Translation of small text

Postby Nohola » 2010-02-21, 23:00

How are the emotional (in)/definite articles used? I take it only Tongan has it, not other Poly langs?
He manao oiwi!

E hoi e pee i ke opu weuweu me he moho la. E ao o hai ka pua o ka mauu ia oe


Return to “Australian, Austronesian and Papuan Languages”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest