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?
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?
