Here's a few snippets from the past information, taken from two sets of translations. These together should allow somewhat of an understanding of how Paravian "works".
Siel i'an i'anient - translated meaning, Know Thyself.
Breakdown as follows:
s'- appears in front of surnames, as well - it is a specifier which can be translated as either "the" or "of" but isn't really that simply defined. It is actually a marker that separates, or defines - an individuation of consciousness. Marks an allotment of "entityship" as it were - a division from the whole. It is a state of beingness.
i - can also be translated "the" but - not in the same way as above - it is an identifer of consciousness individuate - a consciousness aware of itself (by free choice) that is separate by choice, not affliction.
therefore the combined s'i is a division or awareness set apat from the conscious collective, that is awareof itself, or indiviualized.
s'i'el - the word for individuized consciousness, added to "el" which spins the definition out further - meaning a vibration that has tangible existence in Creation.
iel - is the Parvavian word for light - i'el
figure it out.
Siel - literally, then, is "to be light" - "to be illuminated" - actualized BY light.
The simplistic translation in our terms, "to know" - a state of awareness, taken from the conscious collective, individuized (aware of itself) and illuminated into being.
i'an - an is one - 'a' the void before Creation a'n- ('en') the masculine element that gives the "unformed shape" -- a'n, an, one or first
i'an, then is the primal one, given conscious awareness, the self.
('an' is also a suffix - indicating a state of being greater than its first note - or root word.)
ient - suffix indicationg a state of being more fully evolved, beyond that first note (iennt, still more so)
i'anient, is then the state of self at its fullest evolution toward becomingness - definition unto a completion - also translated as 'infinite light'
"i" as suffix lightens the intent - light following the root denotes a shading toward humor, or lessens the impact that 'i" BEFORE the root word (or intent)
"yaft'i" then becomes a genial insult, not a nasty one. (a flippant 'shaft you', rather than the uglier connotations) The "unthought, nonconsidered impact" -
Quen: ria siel-eajinn iel-ffar i'therik.
Quen - one who is narrow minded, qu-e'n
ria - to touch
siel-eajin - the personal forbidden
iel-ffar - iel, illuminate "to make"(to make by clear intent)
i'therik - an unkind twist of fate.
Colloquial English translation is, then a warning:
One who is narrow minded (by choice), to touch on the private is to invoke misfortune.
Ei'qu-an: n'a ffaraton s'murdai.
Colloquial translation, without breakdown, would be:
one who is choosing to STAY narrow minded, (stubborn/selfish) you are setting intent to create enmity.
All right - hope this helps!
"Sliesheng Dhavi! Aykrauk i'en kiel'd'maer tiend!"
Okay. I just can't leave this alone. The first phrase is "slinking fool" for sure. That leaves the last little bit to work out. I'm fairly sure that "aykrauk" is "scorch" or "to scorch" since the "en" suffix seems to modify it to an adjective applying to a person (kiel'd'maer vs. kiel'd'maeren, "one without pity", aykrauken being "scorcher" (one who scorches?)) "i'en"... related to "i'an" or "ient"?
i'an - an is one - 'a' the void before Creation a'n- ('en')
This suggests relationship to "i'an" rather than "ient"... therefore "the one" or "the self" or "the consciousness"... "Quen - one who is narrow minded, qu-e'n" seems to support this as well since it's not "quan"...
"kiel'd'maer" without the "an" suffix would seem to suggest "without pity" or "pitiless" rather than "one without pity" or "pitiless one", similar to my reasoning with "aykrauk".
"tiend"... "t'ien'd"? "t'i'end"? "t'i'en'd"? Must look into this. "tien" = "dream" ... "tiendar" = "spirit tie"... "tiend" = "spirit"? Spirit makes more sense than dream. "t'i'en"... there's "i'en" again... another statement of consciousness?
"To scorch the self/one, spirit without pity"
"Pitiless spirit who scorches the self/this one/this consciousness"
Grammar rules would help too... I can kind of work them out from the above and they seem fairly similar... this seems opposite yet again from my previous guesses, in what intent is ascribed to whom... At least tell me if I'm getting closer? ;.;
Very very close -
pitiless is bang on.
Tiend is spirit.
Scorch is the verb.
Slinking fool! Scorch (?) pitliess spirit!
Your! i'en has to be your!
"Slinking fool! Scorch your pitiless spirit!"
Hmm.. this is amusingly ironic..
Lysaer of the Light
light = i'el
i'el = conscious, individual vibration of tangible existence in Creation
=> Lysaer of the Light = Lysaer of the "Individual"
Alliance of Light = Alliance of the Individual.
Or, as Lysaer might say = "Alliance of Me!"
Konran got it!
I got it? *dances* I got it! ^_^ I've always been fairly good with language... if poor Janny wasn't so busy, I'd be begging for Paravian lessons *grin*
Wow, I must say, Janny, I have new respect for all the effort you put into this now. I took a "worldbuilding" challenge on another message board I frequent, and part of it is creating a language (along with geography, peoples, magic, religion, history, etc....) For one of my races, I came up with a subrace of humans that were desert nomads, with a very "soft" language full of s, r, sh, and l sounds. All we had to do was figure out how to say, "Hello, my name is X, I'm pleased to meet you" and then come up with a small dictionary of about 20 words and create three sentences out of them, but it was a lot more work than I imagined. Maybe it's just 'cause it's past my bedtime, but it's harder than one would think, keeping all the syntax rules straight and the conjugations and everything.... so here's my renewed respect for creating such an awesome, pretty language as Paravian!
aw, i wish I had found this before you solved it. I love studying language...I guess that's why I majored in linguistics. knowing a lot about languages helps to create a language, because many are closely related and work in a similar fashion
The other day I finally went hunting for a topic suitable to post a question in and discovered this one, got to yaft'i and that was the end of any thought of writing a coherent question. Ya has intrigued me for a while, not sure yaft'i was much help but my imagination certainly had some excitement. I have returned now with my question.
I am hopeless at languages, but one oddity concerning the original quote and what we ended up with in the glossary of Stormed Fortress has been bugging me for a while. "Sliesheng Dhavi! Aykrauk i'en kiel'd'maer tiend!" in the glossary (pg 691 mass market edition) of Stormed Fortress ended up as "Sliesheng Dhavi! Aykrauk i'ien kiel'd'maer tiend!" Even though it was written as given here in the actual story (pg 201 mass market edition) So due to a it being written differently in the glossary we seem to have ended up with a new word i'ien. Which would be great except I could never make any sense out of it.
i'ien - an ill wish sent upon you, by intent
i - prefix to specify by light
i - a consciousness aware of itself that is separate by choice, not affiliation.
en - suffix for more
i'en - your
ien - suffix for lightness
ient - suffix for 'most'/indicates a state of fullest evolution, or 'the most.'
iennt - by light intent, extreme emphatic form
ient - dart
i'ient - to hold by light, promise by willing intent
An awareness who chose to be seperate got cursed with too much light? Or was that too much separation?
My question to Janny is how on earth could i'ien mean "an ill wish sent upon you, by intent"