Sentences (89-95)

89. He is my opponent but he is not my enemy. 
bwid blu nami gela-n ea bwid blu vargov. 

90. We heard them speak(ing) all day. 
po zhun klisnezho tri ste va salorr d'yun. 
[Note; the construction ste+verb, which is essentially the infinitive, serves to express "-ing" in sentences like "I see him running", "We watched him working", "John caught Joe napping."]

91. She commanded us to come and we have come. 
di zhun sewirzho pro ste gweam, zhef po ateanzhu. 
[Notes: the verb "to come" is one of the very few Vayoti verbs that has distinct root forms for the past, present and future tenses. Among the other such verbs are "to have" and "to go". In the case of these very unusual verbs, the present tense serves as both present tense form and infinitive form. Thus, in this sentences, both gweam and atean are the verb "come", the former being present tense and also, in this sentence particularly, in conjunction with ste, the infinitive "to come"; the latter, atean is the past tense (came). Verbs of this class do not requires the aspectual suffix, though they may be added, as -zhu was added here, for emphasis--which is why I italicized "have" in the English translation. In fact, even though each distinct form of the verbs in this class already indicates tense, the time determinatives may also  be added for emphasis, just like the aspectual suffixes. Number 92 further illustrates this with the future tense form of gweam, which is tarr.]

92. 
bo tarr = I will come
bo zwe tarr = I will come
bo zwe tarrzhu = I will surely come (there is no doubt this will be accomplished)

93. When the night comes, it will be dark.
sur to nesht tarr, fasre drokis. 
[Remember: modifiers following nouns, in the capacity of attributive adjectives ("the brown house"),  require ste (the house ste brown), but the same words functioning as either predicate adjectives  (after "be"--the house is brown) or adverbs, do not require the particle ste.Note also that in Vayoti the proper formulation is, literally, not "When the night comes..." but "When the night will come...."]

94. I will (always, continually) cherish this hymn. 
bo swi werkav isa sif smen. 
[Remember that the aspectual suffix disappears before a preposition; thus there is no -zho attached to werkav. This particular verb, followed by isa, means "to cherish, prize", but followed by the preposition kom it means"to award, confer". The future continuous time determiner swi conveys that the speaker will not stop cherishing the hymn.]

95. Genesis 1:1-5
In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth. 
isa to kefur edwo zhun kwerrzho tots rimzn zhef to hizhamen. 

Now, the earth was without form and empty, 
avor, to hizhamen fwi ban dweli zhef venkis. 

darkness was above the deep's surface, 
droyoti fwi supri to dovksa litsur,   [dov=darkness; -ksa=possessive ending]

and God's Spirit was hovering over the water. 
zhef edwoksa feyal shan gelom supri to widur. 

And God said, 
zhef edwo zhun spelzhi gdi,  [gdi=a particle introducing direct speech]

Let there be light, and there was light. 
hiye   fa'y'lis,  zhef   ye  zhun  fa'y'lis. 

God saw the light was good, 
edwo  zhun  widzhi  to fa'y'lis  fwi bel, [Notice that where "that" may be omitted in English "God saw (that) the light was good", in Vayoti there is actually no other way to formulate this phrase; there is no equivalent "that" in Vayoti--rather you can only say, "God saw the light was good."]

and He separated the light from the darkness. 
zhef  di  zhun  duwomzho to fa'y'lis  id to droyoti. 

God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. 
edwo  zhun spelzho  to  fa'y'lis  d'yun  zhef  to droyoti  di  zhun  spelzho  nesht. 

And there was evening and there was morning--one day. 
zhef  ye  zhun  dov'yun,   zhef  ye  zhun fajun--bus  d'yun.  

Sentences (66-88)

66. I am grateful you don't feel hot. 
bo  satnakala  ka-n  ea  tankzhi  grakis. 

67. They were having fun and being carefree and I was very pleased and gratified. 
ti  shan  prankala  zhef  l'kala  zhef  bo  zhun  fwetla  satnakala  menk.  

68. We are exultant  (thrilled) in the Lord. 
opo  gavla  isa  to kiren. 

69. The people were ecstatic about the Lord's words.
tots  khizne  shan  hristla  da tots  kirenksa  malvazn. 

70. The people were ecstatic on account of (because of) the Lord's words. 
 tots  khizne  shan  hristla  tots  kirenksa  malvazn  ngar. 

71. Either me (I) or them (they)! 
op bro op tri! 
op bo op ti! 
or, 
op bo op iti! 

72. Where my family (is), there my home (is). 
fur  blu  komnrik,  tir  blu  tumft. 

73. He is a traveling man. 
di  jon  vretra  ste  halzhi. 

74. I was shaving. 
bo shan brezha. (-zha = reflexive suffix)

75. I started shaving. 
bo  shan brezhe.   (-zhe = inceptive suffix)

76. I have started shaving. 
bo zhun brezhe. 

77. I have shaved. 
bo zhun brezhu.  (-zhu = perfective suffix) 

NOTE: the self-referential suffix -ps may be added to make explicit a reflexive action (on oneself) where the reflexive suffix has been sacrificed in favor of a different nuance (inceptive, perfective, intransitive). Thus, nos. 75, 76 and 77 may be further developed as follows: 

bo shan brezheps  (I started shaving myself)
bo zhun brezheps  (I have started shaving myself)
bo zhun brezhups  (I have shaved myself)

78. The one who wants a lot will not be satisfied. 
ton  gu  votelzho  manga-n  ea  zwe  satnakala. 

79. I remember my loving uncle very well. 
bo  mnrazho  bel  menk  slu  dritra  ste  prigarlaf.  

80. I lovingly remember my huge  aunt. 
bo  mnrazho  prigarlaf  slu  drishwa  ste  entkis.  

81.   Give me some of that bread, please. 
do  bro  chu  taf varontiz,  telbel.  

82. "Thank you." "You're welcome." 
tankzn.   efwet. 

83. While conversing, we heard a kind of snore. 
gdukamavi,  po  zhun  klisnezho  jon  fnov  shtiz.  (fnov=snore; shtiz=kind/some kind)

[NOTE: the prefix gdu- turns a verb into a present-tense adverbial participle; a Vayoti equivalent for "when" or "while" is not required; literally, this sentence translate as: "Conversing, we heard a snore some-kind."] 

84. What kind? 
fat shtiz? (fat = what) 
or, 
shtiz fat? 

85. Having spoken long but not memorably, the speaker went to his chair. 
zhduva  delkis  gela-n ea mnrurlaf, to vanur  elel  ites  slu  k'driya. 

[NOTE: the prefix zhdu- turns a verb into a perfective adverbial participle (i.e., having done something); as with gdu-, the prefix alone is all that is required to establish the relationship between the prefixed verb and the sentence's main action; in Vayoti you do not put a word like "After" in front of the perfective adverbial participle; often in English we use a present-tense adverbial participle, preceded by "After", to convey the same as we'd say with "Having ______...." Example, "Having finished his work, he went home/After finishing his work, he went home." In Vayoti, however, these two connotations are strictly segregated from one another grammatically. Both the examples just given would be formulated with zhdu- in Vayoti.]

86. When they were kissing, light shone from their eyes. 
sur  ti  shan  kwasjizha,  fa'y'lis  shan  chelagan  id  utlu  wokzn. 
[NOTE: because of the preposition id the verb chelagan takes no aspectual suffix.]

87.  There is no food in the house. 
banye  p'dad  isa  to [or, ista]  dam. 

88. There will be no dogs on the beach. 
banye   zwe   kwenzn  ina  to  pal'yur.     

Nouns, Writing and Spelling, Syntax

Nouns

The classic endings for nouns are -ov, -am, -iz, -en, -ur. Alternatively, typical nouns will end in a vowel. There is a substantial number of "irregular" nouns, however, the endings of which do not correspond to either of the foregoing descriptions. 

Nouns denoting agency tend to end in either -nur or -tiz. 

Nouns implying action, but not derived directly from verbs, often end in -(a)nta. 

Nouns derived directly from verbs, especially gerunds (e.g., "his weakening led to our strengthening"), tend to end in -va. 

Many nouns denoting abstract concepts end in -yoti. The nuance of this ending is akin to English endings -tion or -ness. 

Writing and Spelling

This applies to the physical process of writing Vayoti in the Vayoti alphabet, which cannot yet be demonstrated on this site. But, for future reference: 

The Vayoti alphabet was, apparently, developed on a "syllabic" concept. Nearly every consonant concludes in a "tail" at about the "middle" (what we would consider the top of a lower-case letter), custom-made to flow directly into any one of the five vowels, which of course begin at the same "middle” point. For an analogy, imagine writing a cursive lower-case “t” and from the crossbar of the “t” (not from the bottom!) flowing directly into a cursive lower-case “u”. An even better anaology is the word “be”, cursive, all lower-case. 

Vowels, on the contrary, never connect to any following letter. 

Thus, a hypothetical Vayoti word "balofiguze" would look to the English-speaker's untrained eye like five letters: ba lo fi gu ze, the "b" connecting with the "a" in what appears to be a single letter, likewise the "l" with the "o" and so on. 

The exceptions are the following “tailless" consonants. They cannot be connected in writing to a following vowel or any other letter. Note that, because “s” is a tailless consonant, several other consonants incorporating “s” are likewise tailless: 

ks

fs

ps

s

sp

sk

In this vein, note also that in Vayoti, there are many “single” letters representing sounds which we can represent in English only with a pair of letters (like sh, ch, ts). Consider, analogously, that our English “j” sound (joy, general) can only be represented in the alphabets of certain other languages by a combination of two letters, the first representing the d-sound, the next representing the zh-sound: “dzh”. 

This is why the Vayoti alphabet contains so many more letters than the English one.. In Vayoti there are, besides the “normal” letters, distinct letters for each of these sounds: bl, br, bw, kl, kr, kw, kn, ks, dl, dr, dw, fl, fr, fw, fn, fs, gl, gr, gw, gn, gd, pl, pr, pw, pn, ps, sl, sr, sw, sm, sn, sp, st, sf, sk, tl, tr, tw, vl, vr, vw, vn, vz, zl, zr, zw, zn, zd, (a light guttural) kh, ch, zh, ts, sh, sht, shw, zhd, and perhaps the strangest to the English-speaker, mnr. 

(Note: like English, Vayoti has as well its own “j[oy]” letter—a single letter, not a “dzh” combination.)

This long list of letters should not be intimidating. Frequently it is simply a matter of writing the basic letters, e.g., “f” and “l”, crunched together more closely to produce the single letter (“fl”). This is especially so with all the “combination letters” ending in -l or -w. “ks” and “fs” and “ps” are obvious mergers of k+s, f+s, and p+s. 

The combination letters commencing with s- will require some habituation, as well as several other “unique”forms, among them kn, fn, gr, gn, gd, tr, zhd. 

While the Vayoti letters kh, ch, zh, ts, sh and mnr may seem to the English-speaker to be “combination letters” because we represent the sounds with two or three letters in English, they are NOT combination letters in Vayoti. A true combination-letter in Vayoti is one based on two sounds for each of which there is a proper letter in its own right. Thus, “zhd” is a combination-letter, because there is a letter “zh” and a letter “d” in Vayoti. Likewise “sm”, because there is a letter “s” and a letter “m” and the letter “sm” is a separate letter combining these sounds. But the Vayoti letters kh, ch, zh, ts, sh and mnr are not considered combination-letters. “ch” is not a combination of two sounds, but a single sound, and letter, in Vayoti. Likewise with the rest—yes, even including, counter-intuitively, “mnr”, which the Vayoti-speaker conceptualizes NOT as a blend m+n+r but as a unique phoneme in its own right. This sound has ancient roots in a Proto-Indo-European semi-vocalic consonant. 

On rare occasion, if  the tail of a consonant interferes with the following letter, the tail can be left out. 

If the tail of a consonant can comfortably flow into a following consonant, it is permissible. For instance, "n" is frequently found flowing directly into "t". The consonant "s", which itself does not flow into any other letter (it has no tail), is so formed that many other consonants naturally "want" to flow into it. 

When three consonants are clustered together, these conventions are traditionally observed, though they are not rigid rules:  

a. At the beginning of a word, the first sound (frequently s) is a single letter and the next two are a mixed letter; for example: s-pr; s-kl, s-tr.

b. Inside a word, it is the other way around:  sp-r; sk-l, st-r.

c. There are exceptions to this rule, especially in connection with endings and suffixes. They do not, as a rule, present an "opportunity" to reconfigure single and mixed consonant letters, though such a reconfiguring may indeed already be evident in the word's established form. 

In short, the lexical form of every word (as in any other language) has already been determined and fixed; it is not up to the writer to "decide" on this. Where there are irregular forms and "exceptions to the rule," they are fixed and "correct" in their own right. 

Spelling Note: when the "gerunding" suffix –va is added to words already ending in –v, then the two v's are written out, i.e., vv, but they are pronounced as if there were a "doubling" accent over a single v, i.e., as a sustained but single consonant. They do not become separate syllables (v'v). For example: spenavva, which means "dependent."

Syntax

When modifiers are used as adverbs, they can be placed before the subject or after the entire ‘subject-verb phrase’ (which includes the subject, the time-determinant [in past and future] and of course the verb-with-suffix); you cannot break up the subject-verb phrase with a modifier.

Question words (who, what, why, etc.) can break the rule about subject-verb syntax! Before  a verb they carry their simple meaning (e.g., Who is he? Why did you leave early?) But when they are placed between the negative particle ea and the verb, they take on a negative meaning, along the lines of “no one, nobody, nothing, never, no how”, etc. 

An alternative method of expressing this is to use the word later in the sentence prefixed with op-. So, adding op- to fat (what) you get opfat, which means “nothing, nothing at all”. opk’fen means “never”, but k’fen also means “never” if it stands between ea and the verb. kan means “who?” but it means “no one” after ea, and opkan means “no one” if it’s used after the verb. Also, question words can have the “any-, -ever” sense if they are used without ea. 

So, “he never speaks” can be: 

di-n ea k’fen vazhi or di-n ea vazhi opk’fen

“Whenever he speaks” is opk’fen di vazhi 

“Whoever speaks” – opkan vazhi

“Whatever he takes” – opfat di hapishzho 

“What does he take?”  - fat di hapishzho? 

“He takes nothing”  - di-n ea fat hapishzho  or  di-n ea hapishzho opfat

The word ngar has two meanings: it is an emphatic form of “because” (gar) and as such stands in the same place as it would if it were in the non-emphatic form, i.e., at the beginning of the phrase. But when ngar means “because of”, it stands after the word or phrase it refers to. So, “because of the rain” would go like this “the rain ngar…”. “Because of him” is dri ngar (note the use of the “accusative”, i.e., object-form of the pronoun – it is dri, not di). 

In English we have these three ways of formulating an idea like the following:

1. Because he always finishes late… (e.g., my part of the job is always delayed.) 

2. Because of his always finishing late…, etc. 

3. Because of him always finishing late…, etc.  (This is a colloquial and traditionally not very “correct” way of saying it.) 

In Vayoti, numbers 1 and 3 exist, but number 2 doesn’t. And in general, formulation number 1 is far easier and to be preferred. 

Version number 1 is formulated in Vayoti exactly the same way: “gar dri (always finishes late…)”. Or “ngar dri….”  

Version number 3 (which we’ll call “version 2” in Vayoti, since there are only two!) goes like this, literally: “dri ngar ste always finishes late…, etc.” dri ngar expresses “because of him”; ste points to the following phrase as descriptive of “him”. This version is a bit more complicated, but it is also powerfully expressive. 

Sentences (1-65)

Here, I will begin posting sentences in Vayoti. Actual sentences should be the learner's primary tool for Vayoti acquisition and development in proficiency. The other sections on parts of speech and grammar in general should serve as reference material, but the development of facility and fluency should come from interaction with the language in real use. 

This post will continue to grow with time, as I keep adding sentences. As of today, Aug. 5, 2017, just an initial small offering will be posted, and then I will be away for a month. Starting in mid-September I plan to continue posting sentences. 

The first fourteen are, for fun, a bit more advanced than "absolute beginner" but after that we will go back to "the beginning" and proceed more incrementally. 

Stressed syllables are in bold font. 

--------------------------------------------------------

1

bo prigarzho tots amnrazn da tots emannizn ste yavkris.

I love the legends about the ancient heroes. 

2

do bro chu meffen, telbel.

Give me some wine, please. 

3

kaffa, meffen? ka gnozhi, banchish kra.

What do you mean, wine? You know you mustn't. 

4

uvli po kits tap bo m'gla ste foigwu. vasher bro! 

Let's see how fast I can run. Time me! 

5

blu vasherksa litsur bwi glurlaf menk. 

The surface of my watch is very clear/transparent/clean.

6

bo zhun haszho to mulur id kra zhef bo zhun mowilzho kra ste do fre bro kus yervamzn vukh. 

I requested the hammer from you and I asked you to give it to me two hours ago. 

7

tanur bo zhun kelzho tots bachk'yuzn, bo zhun itserzho tots fidtazn its'ta dakitse.

After I hid the cookies, I let the children into the room

its'ta is a contraction of itsa to

8

sijun to awettam bwi munslaf blovi.

Today the sky is less blue.

muns means "smaller amount/quantity; a 'less-ness'; fewer," and the Modifier form munslaf conveys something like "to a lesser degree, less, 'lessnessly'."

9

jon d'yun munslaf ste grakis

A less hot day

10

khizne pega atean ites to wiksa ksur.

Few people came to the village meeting.

pega connotes a paucity of something, and it is placed after the noun it relates to; "village meeting" is phrased in exactly the same way in Vayoti, i.e., "village", then "meeting"

11

khizne kis'shen shan melidozhi t'rur alnazn shan chenurazhi. 

A few people were praying while others were singing. 

kis'shen conveys "a few", in the more positive sense (contrast pega/few with kis'shen/a few); alnazn means "others"; the alternate form of t'rur could have been used in this sentence: tor

12

vripnuzn muns amazho lofurzn idik gwivnuzn.

Fewer boys love flowers than girls. 

idik means "than"

13

opid ye muns, bo-n ea zesh spelzhi ye manksam.

Although there is less, I wouldn't say there is a deficit. 

opid means "although/while"; the negative is expressed by the form -n ea. 

-----

Note that in Vayoti there is no equivalent to English "that/who(m)" as in sentences like "She is the woman that (whom) I love" or "This is the book that I lost two weeks ago."

When the subject/actor in the second clause is the same as in the first, or the second clause is otherwise the direct outcome of the first verb (as in this example), then Vayoti ALWAYS does what English only SOMETIMES does, i.e., the ONLY possible formulation in Vayoti goes like "She is the woman I love" and "This is the book I lost two weeks ago," without ANY connecting "that" (which, anyway, doesn't exist in Vayoti). 

Thus, in sentence 13, while we could say in English "I wouldn't say that there is a deficit," in Vayoti this is impossible. Only the version provided above is possible. 

NOTE: when you cannot possibly leave out "that/who" in English, i.e., in sentences like "He is the man who insulted me" or "She is the woman who turned down my marriage proposal" or "That is the elephant that sat on my car," then the Vayoti equivalent to this form of "that/who" MUST be used, and it is the word gu. 

This should cause no problem for the English-speaker, because the simple rule is this: If you can omit "that/who(m)" in English without it being total nonsense, then it is automatically omitted in Vayoti. If you can't, then you need the Vayoti word gu. 

"She is the woman turned down my marriage proposal" is ungrammatical nonsense. You need the Vayoti gu, just as you need the English "who." 

Likewise, "He is the man insulted me"--grammatical nonsense: "who/that"/gu required. 

But you can say, "Christmas Day is the holiday (that) I love most" without inserting "that". In Vayoti, therefore, NO word is employed where English "that" would be. 

-----

14

several phrases: 

jon manga dakitsetsi dam [dakitse=room; manga=many]

a many-roomed house

jon bukhi maratsi vretra   [mara=wife; bukhi=once]

a once-wifed man (a man who's only had one wife)

to bus shuntratsi edwo   [bus=one; shuntra=son]

the one-Sonned God (the God Whose Only-Begotten Son is Christ)

The suffix -tsi participializes NOUNS, i.e., makes nouns adjectival

15

bwid blu priksa pri.

He is my friend's friend. 

16

fwit blu prizn.

They were my friends.

17

fwit blu priznksa prizn.

They were my friends' friends.

18

kasre blu priznksa pri.

You will be my friends' friend. 

19

(a silly sentence)

franklin bwid vwirkhaktsa* pri. [vwirkha=electricity]

Franklin is electricity's friend.  

*Note the variation on the possessive suffix -ksa, here -ktsa; this variation is employed to facilitate pronunciation; the "hard stop" provided by the "t" makes the word for "electricity's" easier to say that "vwirkhaksa." 

20

blu priksaps vwirkha

my friend's very own electricity

pri=friend; -ksa=possessive suffix; -ps=emphatic possessive suffix

21

blu vwirkhaps

my very own electricity

22

blu pri

my friend

23 

blu prips

my very own friend

24

di zhun s'yuzhi.  [s'yu=give birth, bear (a child)]

She has given birth.

Why the Intransitive Aspectual Suffix -zhi, since, obviously, no one can give birth in the absence of a "direct object", i.e., the baby? It is because the nuance here is precisely that conveyed by the English, i.e., that she has given birth, not that she has borne...X. See the next example.

25

di zhun s'yuzho jon hugtra.

She has given birth to (i.e., borne) a daughter

Alternatively, the Perfective connotation of this statement could be further underlined by using the suffix -zhu rather than -zho

26

di zhun pitruzhi.

He has become a father (i.e., "he has fathered")

27

di zhun pitruzho jon fidta.

He has fathered a child. 

28

to vretra hagrala.

The man is rich. 

There is no verb "is" in this sentence because the verb hagrala is an "-ala verb", i.e., a verb conveying state/condition; in other words, the notion "to be rich" is all contained in the one verb. 

29

bwif ka bo prigarzho.

It's you I love. 

Note that, just as in English, the verb To Be is formulated in the third-person "inanimate"--It (the "f" in bwif indicating the pronoun fe: it). Also, as already noted above, such a construction in Vayoti contains NO "that", and in fact there IS no word "that" in Vayoti that could be used in this sense. For the kind of sentence that DOES require "that" (in a different sense), see the next example....

30

bwif ka gu zhun swezho bro. [swe=convince]

It's you who convinced me. 

31

ka mapsala  [mapsala=an -ala verb, meaning, "to be right]

You are right.

32

ka zwe mapsala.  

You will be right.

33

ka swi mapsala.

You will (continually, ongoingly) be right.

34

ka swi mapsalaps/mapsalazhips

(free interpretation:) 

"You will go on being 'right' and very pleased with yourself over it." (sarcasm)

In this sentence the Personal Emphatic Suffix -ps has been added, connoting that "you" are intent on continually proving you are right, for your own gratification; in the second version the Intransitive Aspectual Suffix -zhi has also been added, preceding -ps, to underline even more strongly that this action, i.e., "being right", doesn't "go anywhere", that is, it is all about the "right" person's inner world and self-image.  

35

ka shan mapsalazheps

(a very free interpretation:)

"You had vain ambitions of vindicating yourself that never managed to get off the ground." 

Here, the Time Particle is the Past Continuous, indicating that the person kept doing this, i.e., trying to be right; this is reinforced by the Inceptive Aspectual Suffix -zhe, which points to the action as only just getting started, not really "taking off" yet; finally, the Personal Emphatic -ps underlines the entire act as being wholly self-oriented. This sentence would not be received as in any way friendly! For something a bit friendler, see the next example....

36

tots gwevrazn ste prisek [gwevra=woman; prisek=friendly]

the friendly women 

37

tots gwevrazn gu bwit prisek (or, ...gu prisek)

the women who are friendly

38

prech di zesh hapishzho fre? [hapish=take]

Would he take it? 

prech is an interrogative particle

39

ye jon prigartiz kra.

or, ye jon prigartiz fi kra.

There is a lover for you.

The suffix -tiz is one of the two "agent" suffixes, indicating "one who does this." The other suffix is "-nur." Also, note that in this construction the preposition "for", which is fi in Vayoti, is optional. Often the object form of the pronoun (kra) is sufficient to convey the sense of "for". 

40

(just an opening fragment of a sentence)

brongar ste prigarzho to sa'y'dov... 

Because of my loving the world...

The first word in this sentence is a compound of the Object Form of bo (I), which is bro, and the particle-suffix -ngar, which conveys "because of, on account of, in view of." The sense of brongar, therefore, is something like "On account of me...." After that the adjective marker ste is employed in precisely the same way it would be used in a phrase like to vretra ste mnrazhi--the thinking man. In crudely ungrammatical English, the sense of this Vayoti formulation is something like "On account of me loving the world...." 

41

tringar ste fwit suwittu, ti shan jofezho edwo. [suwit=satiate; jofe=worship]

Due to their being satiated, they were worshipping God. (I.e., they worshipped God because they were full.) 

42

prechi ka votelzhi ste hal kombro? [hal=travel]

Do you want to travel with me? 

prechi is an alternate form of prech; kombro is a compound consisting of kom (with) and the Object Form of bo. 

43

ea, bo votelzhi ste hal bankra.

No, I want to travel without you. 

ea is "No", bankra is a compound of ban (without) and the Object Form of ka. 
44
po zhun wolnazhu tri.
We have deceived them.
45
lav, ti zhun wolnazhu bro bukhi, gela ka-n ea zwe wolnazho bro vis.  [gela=but; bukhi=once, one time]
Okay, they fooled me once, but you won't fool me too! 
vis="too; also"; another word meaning "too, also" is zhefts, but zhefts would be the wrong word to use here, as its nuance would be something like "either", which would make nonsense of this sentence both in English and Vayoti. To be specific, the phrase "you won't fool me zhefts" conveys the notion "you won't fool me just like they didn't fool me" (except they did, so it makes no sense!), while "you won't fool me vis" conveys something like "I won't let you be another one who fools me the way they fooled me." zhefts  is something like "ditto" or, in negative sentences, "either." See, for example, the next sentence....
46
di-n ea zhun wolnazhu bro zhef ka-n ea wolnazho bro zhefts. 
He hasn't deceived me and you aren't deceiving me either (lit. "also", "ditto"). 
47
bedanta, pidokhva zhef prigarva, sifts dus...
Faith, hope and love, these three...
48
fe kwispala di hakhzhi. [kwispala=seem; hakh=ail, be sick]
It seems he's sick. 
Note that, even though we normally translate hakh as "to be sick", in Vayoti it is not a stative (i.e., -ala) verb. The more old-fashioned verb "to ail" is a good equivalent. Note, too, the absence of a connecting "that" in both the English (though it could be inserted) and Vayoti (where it can't, because it doesn't exist). 
49
fe kwispala bwik jon nikh ste mahafsek. [nikh=person; mahafsek=forgiving]
It seems you are a forgiving person. 
50
di shan vazhi mahafsek. [va=speak, talk]
He was speaking forgivingly. 
51
ea bwib swetu. [swe=convince]
I'm not convinced. 
52
iti bwit prizn ste votelsek menk ste fal. [votelsek=desirable; menk=very; fal=have]
They are very desirable friends to have. 
53
di hundala.  [hundala=be ordinary]
He is ordinary. 
54
di jon vretra ste hundala. 
He is an ordinary man. 
55
di jon vretra gu hundala. [gu=who, which, that]
He is a man who is ordinary. 
56
bo votelzho kra ste frendu.
I want you to answer. 
57
bo-n ea votelzho kra ste frendu.
I don't want you to answer. 
58
bo votel iteste frendu ka. 
I desire/want that you (should) answer. 
Note that the Aspectual Suffix dropped out in front of the compound iteste, which begins with the preposition ites. This last version, in the subjunctive, would be felt as more forceful and demanding than sentence 56. 
59
baps opo, po zwe lagwezho slu satnakalava. 
As for us, we will earn our satisfaction. 
60
baps bo, bo swi ezho edwoksa malva.
As for me, I will (be) esteem(ing) God's word. 
61
ban strezh!  [strezh=hurry, rush]
Don't hurry!
62
ban strezh po. 
Let's not hurry.
63
ban tro tri bro. 
or, ban tro tri bozhor.  [-zhor=for the sake of; tro=rush, hurry, usually in the sense of doing it to somebody else]
Don't rush them for me/for my sake.
Note that the Object Pronoun (bro) can convey, even without any accompanying preposition like "for", that an action is conceptualized as relating to, being "for", the person indicated by the pronoun. This should not be foreign to the English speaker, as we can say either "Buy a Coke for me" or "Buy me a Coke," omitting "for." The Vayoti Object Form (which functions as both Direct and Indirect Object) is similarly flexible. 
64
f'yu po strezhzhi?  [f'yu=why]
Why are we hurrying?
65
fat, prechi opo strezhzhi?
or, 
fat, prechidur po strezhzhi? [fat=what; prechi/prechidur=interrogative particles, the second conveying a certain incredulity, as if to say "Really...?"]
What, are we hurrying? or, What, are we really hurrying?