Is this a Lakota sentence?

[jurga at ou.edu]

I am not doing this to confuse anybody, but here is another interesting translation. I am actually quite enjoying this. According to yet another speaker, if this phrase comes from a song or prayer, it could mean, "Younger brother, we make up (o-glu waste) [and make it known] around the world." I think this example only shows the problems that we are facing in translation, because my experience with Lakota so far shows that the words can mean many different things and without knowing the cultural context it is sometimes hard to even make sense. 
Jurga

----- Original Message -----
From: cantemaza <mckay020 at umn.edu>
Date: Wednesday, September 7, 2005 5:07 pm
Subject: Re: Is this a Lakota sentence?

> Based on the original text in the first e-mail  with "Misun, oglu 
> waste 
> maka sitomni yelo!",
> the translation of "Younger brother, there are good things around 
> the 
> world." does fit.  Of course if this were from a conversation, 
> based on 
> what was being discussed, it could take on even more meanings.  
> This is 
> very important to remember and something that I try to pass on to 
> my 
> students of the Dakota language.  Context and meaning are very 
> important 
> to the speaker and it can be very hard to just say "Hey!  What 
> does this 
> phrase mean??"  Yes, the speaker does throw their spin and 
> personal 
> interpretatiopn on these words/phrases which makes it even more 
> necessary to be mindful when working with the langauge and 
> including the 
> indigenous perspective instead of saying "This is the one and only 
> way 
> to say this."   Thanks for asking around.  It is much appreciated!
> 
> -Cantemaza de miye do!
> 
> 
> jurga at ou.edu wrote:
> 
> >I showed the same sentence to another speaker, and he translated 
> it as "Younger brother, there are good things around the world." 
> It seems that "we make" or "there are" are the parts that the 
> speakers fill in depending on their own understanding of the 
> sentence. I thought it might be interesting from the point of view 
> of the "cultural" part of the language, which might be hidden in 
> the context (which is interesting to me as a cultural/linguistic 
> anthropologist). I will let you know if I hear of any other variants.
> >Jurga Saltanaviciute
> >P.S. I am currently at the Sicangu Oyate (or Rosebud Sioux 
> Reservation); translations were done in person.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: cantemaza <mckay020 at umn.edu>
> >Date: Wednesday, September 7, 2005 3:40 pm
> >Subject: Re: Is this a Lakota sentence?
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Just out of curiosity, who was it agin that asked Albert 
> WhiteHat 
> >>how to 
> >>tranlsate this?  Was it done orally or in written form like an e-
> >>mail or 
> >>something? 
> >>I'm asking because I do not see the "we" in the "we make things 
> >>good."   
> >>This would be unhduwaste (Damakota do!) for we/you and I and not 
> >>ohduwaste which does by itself have the meaning of changing 
> >>something 
> >>into the positive or haviong a positive effect on 
> >>something/someone or 
> >>making something good.  If someone were to ask me (and they 
> >>haven't plus 
> >>I am very young)  to translate "Younger brother, we make the 
> world 
> >>better" I would say
> >>
> >>"Misun, maka sitomniya unhduwaste ye/do."
> >>
> >>Just my two cents.
> >>
> >>Hehanyedan epe kte do.
> >>
> >>-Cantemaza de miye do!
> >>
> >>Koontz John E wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>On Tue, 6 Sep 2005 jurga at ou.edu wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>I just asked Mr. White Hat for help with this sentence, and his
> >>>>translation was:
> >>>>
> >>>>Younger  brother, we make things good around the world,
> >>>>
> >>>>or,
> >>>>
> >>>>Younger brother, we make the world better.
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>Orignal:
> >>>
> >>>(correcting to yelo from yalo)
> >>>
> >>>"Misun,    oglu    waste   maka   sitomni    yelo!"
> >>>[misuN'    oglu'   was^te' makxa' sito'mni   yelo']
> >>>y-bro VOC fortune good    world  all around DECLm
> >>>
> >>>Alfred Tueting comments:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>With all due respect for Mr. W-H's competence, this 
> translation 
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>seems to
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>be in need of linguistical elucidation, doesn't it?.
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>I was a little surprised at this comment at first reading.  I 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>don't think
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Mr. White Hat's linguistic (speech) competence has ever been 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>faulted by
> >>    
> >>
> >>>anyone I know, though some have grumbled about his linguistic 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>(technical)>practice (in orthography, as I recall), if folks 
> will 
> >>forgive me using the
> >>    
> >>
> >>>word linguistic in two different senses in one sentence.  I think,
> >>>however, that Alfred meant only that the rendition above needed
> >>>"linguistic elucidation," to explain how such a variant 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>translation had
> >>    
> >>
> >>>come about.
> >>>
> >>>As far as elucidating the original, I think he and Bruce have 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>essentially>already done that.  I'm still not clear if the 
> >>sentence is idiomatic,
> >>    
> >>
> >>>though idiomaticity must be a variable and moving target in a 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>language as
> >>    
> >>
> >>>widely distributed and lively as Lakota.  Maybe some places 
> oglu 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>was^te is
> >>    
> >>
> >>>the usual expression for 'fortun(ate)'?
> >>>
> >>>I suspect this alternative approach to rendering the sentence 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>results from
> >>    
> >>
> >>>trying to make sense of the unusual aspects of the original 
> sentence>>>already noted, i.e., the unusual word for oglu for 
> '(good) 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>fortune' and
> >>    
> >>
> >>>writing yelo as yalo under the influence of English spelling.  
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>This last
> >>    
> >>
> >>>glitch, in particular, adds a causative or verb of motion, if 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>taken at
> >>    
> >>
> >>>face value, and I think that leads to the causative in Mr. 
> White 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Hat's>English rendition.  But, if it's a causative, what is 
> >>causativized?  In
> >>    
> >>
> >>>what person is the resulting construction to be construed and,
> >>>pragmatically, translated?  In essence, I think Mr. White Hat 
> is 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>trying to
> >>    
> >>
> >>>be faithful "to the letter" of a fairly obscure text.
> >>>
> >>>So, to adapt an old computer science maxim and raise it to the 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>level of a
> >>    
> >>
> >>>scientific principle, my explanation of the difference is 
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>"Garbled in,
> >>    
> >>
> >>>garbled out."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>.
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >.
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
>