The Book of Revelation, Chapter 13
The following is a verse-by-verse interlinear gloss of an Ic̣aa'yanşi translation of Revelation 13. Glosses for longer verses are broken up into smaller units where possible.
1
1a
Nixya faxu 'u turaku ma ninsaaşaŋḳa kutaw.
ni-xja fa-xu ʔu turaku ma niⁿsa-aʃaⁿǂa kutaw
3S-stand.4legs PFV-EXP ABS dragon LOC POS.3S.II-shore ocean
A dragon stood at the shore of the ocean.
Comments
The verb for standing is one that is only used for things with 4 or more legs. A different verb is used for things with 2 legs (i.e. humans)
The suffix -xu is an evidential marker (gloss: EXP). It doesn't appear in the English, but it is clear from this that the speaker witnessed this. You will see it used quite often throughout the passage.
1b
Ŋkisu aasuawa faxu 'a'uŋki niansa xya faxu 'u ŋkaansaa ma kutaw.
ⁿkisu aːsuawa fa-xu ʔa-ʔuⁿki ni-aⁿsa xja fa-xu ʔu ⁿkaːⁿsaː ma kutaw
and 1S>3S-see PFV-EXP ATTR-that.happening 3S-exit stand.4legs PFV-EXP ABS beast LOC sea
and I saw that a beast come out from the sea.
Comments
Ic̣aa'yanşi has one locative preposition: ma. This can be interpreted as at/to/from depending on context; the verb here makes it clear that this should be interpreted as motion from the sea.
1c
Swafi faxu 'u 'araansa runşa ŋkisu swaayla faxu 'u 'ansiinsa nṭac̣aw ŋkisu swanşuu'a faxu 'u 'araansa kuruna ma runşa ŋkisu swac̣aşa faxu 'u 'au'u 'yalu'aa'a ma nṭac̣aw'i.
swa-fi fa-xu ʔu ʔa-raːⁿsa ruⁿʃa ⁿkisu
swa-ajla fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿsiːⁿsa ⁿǃaǀaw ⁿkisu
swa-ⁿʃuːʔa fa-xu ʔu ʔa-raːⁿsa kuruna ma ruⁿʃa ⁿkisu
swa-ǀaʃa fa-xu ʔu ʔa-uʔu ʔjaluʔaːʔa ma ⁿǃaǀaw-ʔi
3P-oblong.grounded PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-ten horn and
3P-round.fixed PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-seven head and
3P-open.enclosing PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-ten crown LOC horn and
3P-write PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-name blaspheme LOC head-DIS
Ten (oblong) horns stood (on the heads) and seven (round) heads were attached (to the beast) and ten (open/hollow) crowns enclosed each horn.
There were ten horns and seven heads and ten crowns on the horns and a blasphemous name was written on each head.
Comments
Rather than just "There existed...", the dispositional verbs tell the shape and the orientation of the subject. The top English sounds very awkward, but it's natural in Ic̣aa'yanşi.
Passivization ("was written") is done by simply dropping the ergative argument from the pronominal prefix. Ic̣aa'yanşi can drop ergative arguments from a statement, but the pronominal prefix always indexes the argument's person and number if the argument exists. Since the pronominal prefix swa does not index an ergative argument, then the the writing is understood as passive. This will come back to haunt me later...
2
2a
Niawaŋi fajuxu ŋi ŋkaːnsaː ʔu tjui, ⁿkima swaawaŋi fajuxu ŋi itaw ʔu ususa, ⁿkima swaawaŋi fajuxu ŋi ⁿkutaw ʔu ⁿsiʔi
ni-awa-ŋi fa-ju-xu ŋi ŋkaːnsaː ʔu tjui, ⁿkima swa-awa-ŋi fa-ju-xu ŋi itaw ʔu ususa, ⁿkima swa-awa-ŋi fa-ju-xu ŋi ⁿkutaw ʔu ⁿsiʔi
3S-see-CAUS PFV-NVOL-EXP ERG beast ABS jaguar, but 3P-see-CAUS PFV-NVOL-EXP ERG feet ABS bear and 3P-see-CAUS PFV-NVOL-EXP ERG mouth ABS puma
The beast made me see a jaguar, but the feet made me see a bear and the mouth made me see a puma.
The beast looked like a jaguar, but the feet looked like a bear and the mouth looked like a puma.
Comments
The 2a line was what prompted my looking into perception.
There are no leopards or lions in Central America, so the animals were changed to something more understandable. * leopard > jaguar * lion > puma
There are no bears in the area, and there doesn't seem to be a fitting substitue. The Spanish word oso becomes usu in Ic̣aa'yanşi. Usu is already an Ic̣aa'yanşi word which means darkness, and there is a derived word ususaa which used to mean a nocturnal animal. Now, bears aren't nocturnal, but there are some big scary animals that are, so I figured a semantic shift like this could be possible: * (big scary) nocturnal animal > big scary animal > [Spanish contact here] > bear
2b
Sansuŋku'a fanşuŋkwaxu ŋi turaku 'i ŋkaːnsaː 'u ninsixuşi myu ninsiturunu myu ninsi'aalap̣ansuu ŋkaŋka
saⁿsu-ⁿkuʔa fa-ⁿʃu-ⁿkwa-xu ŋi turaku ʔi ⁿkaːnsaː ʔu niⁿsi-xuʃi mju niⁿsi-turunu mju niⁿsi-ʔa-alaʘaⁿsuː ⁿkaⁿka
3S>3S-give PFV-VOL-WIL-EXP ERG dragon DAT beast ABS POS.3S.IA-power and POS.3S.IA-throne and ATTR-authority great
The dragon gave the beast its power and its throne and its great authority.
Comments
- throne: trono (Spanish) > turunu
3
3a
Ninşi faxu 'u 'aŋkaaşa xifinsa ma 'ainsa ninsanṭac̣aw ŋkaansaa, ŋkima nirampwi faxu 'u 'aŋkaaşa xifinsa.
ni-ⁿşi fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿkaːʃa ∅-xifiⁿsa ma ʔa-iⁿsa niⁿsa-ⁿǃaǀaw ⁿkaːⁿsaː, ⁿkima ni-raⁿpwi fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿkaːʃa ∅-xifiⁿsa
3S-exist PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-wound PTCP-live.CESS LOC ATTR-one POS.3S.II-head beast, but 3S-heal PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-wound PTCP-live.CESS
There existed a fatal wound on one of the beast's heads, but the fatal wound had healed.
3b
Sansunsu faxu ŋi ŋkaa'ii 'u 'ansaaanşi, ŋkisu xaansu'ip̣asi fanşuŋkwaxu ŋi fiic̣aa ʔu ŋkaansaa.
saⁿsu-ⁿsu fa-xu ŋi ⁿkaːʔiː ʔu ʔa-ⁿsaːaⁿʃi, ⁿkisu xaːⁿsu-ʔiʘasi fa-ⁿʃu-ⁿkwa-xu ŋi fi-iǀaː ʔu ⁿkaːⁿsaː
3S>3S-fill PFV-EXP ERG wonder ABS ATTR-world.anim, and 3P>3S-follow PFV-VOL-WIL-EXP ERG all-person ABS beast
Wonder filled the world, and everyone (willingly and intentionally) followed the beast.
4
4a
Xaansuiimaya faŋkwaxu ŋi ic̣aa 'u turaku, ma ninsap̣ic̣aw sansuŋku'aṭa fanşu 'i ninsialap̣ansuu ŋkaansaa,
xaːⁿsu-iːmaja fa-ⁿkwa-xu ŋi iǀaː ʔu turaku, ma niⁿsa-ʘiǀaw saⁿsu-ⁿkuʔa-!a fa-ⁿʃu ʔi niⁿsi-alaʘaⁿsuː ⁿkaːⁿsaː,
3P>3S-worship PFV-WIL-EXP ERG people ABS dragon, LOC POS.3S.II-face 3S.E.ES.A-give-ANTIP DAT POS.3S.IA-authority beast
People worshipped the dragon because it gave the beast its authority.
Comments
In addition to being used for physical location, some body parts are used to introduce some types of clauses. Here, the phrase "at its face" introduces the cause of the worshipping.
4b
ŋkisu xaansuiimaya si faŋkwaxu 'u ŋkaansaa,
ⁿkisu xaːⁿsu-iːmaja fa-ⁿkwa-xu ʔu ⁿkaansaa,
and 3P>3S-worship also PFV-WIL-EXP ABS beast
and they worshipped also the beast,
4c
ŋkisu xaansuṭiia faŋkwaxu xay, ṭansa ma ninşi fatti 'u ŋkaansaaŋi?
ⁿkisu xaːⁿsu-ǃiːa fa-ⁿkwa-xu xaj ǃaⁿsa ma ni-ⁿʃi fa-tːi ʔu ⁿkaansaa-ŋi
and 3P>3S-ask PFV-WIL-EXP QUOT QUES.anim LOC 3S-exist PFV-INT ABS beast-ISH
and they asked, "Who is like the beast?
4d
Ṭansa ŋi sansuup̣a''i fa awatti?"
ǃaⁿsa ŋi saⁿsu-u.ʘa.ʔːi fa a-wa-tːi
QUES.anim ERG 3S>3S-battle do PFV-POT-INT
Who can fight it?
Comments
One of the features of the Mesoamerican Language Area is a concept with the delightful name of "pied-piping with inversion". So this is an example of my implementation for Ic̣aa'yanşi. Basically, in questions, instead of the normal VSO word order, question words and any prepositions for them are fronted and the word order within the fronted phrase is diffent than the normal order. In 4c and 4d, prepositions come after the fronted question word. I should probably get more natlang info on this feature, but for now, this is where I'm at with it.
5
Niŋku'a faxu 'i ŋkaansaa 'u ŋkutaw ma ninsap̣ic̣aw sansu'ja faa 'u nsa'ja mju 'jalu'aa'a ŋkisu ma ninsap̣ic̣aw sansunṭup̣a faa 'u ninsialap̣ansuu ma 'ailju mju aʃansii ruuṭa.
ni-ⁿkuʔa fa-xu ʔi ⁿkaansaa ʔu ⁿkutaw ma niⁿsa-ʘiǀaw saⁿsu-ʔja faː ʔu ⁿsaʔja mju ʔjaluʔaːʔa ⁿkisu ma niⁿsa-ʘiǀaw saⁿsu-ⁿǃuʘa faː ʔu niⁿsi-alaʘaⁿsuː ma ʔa-ilju mju aʃaⁿsiː ruːǃa
3S-give PFV-EXP DAT beast ABS mouth LOC POS.3S.II-spine 3S>3S-say ABS insolence and blasphemy and LOC POS.3S.II-spine 3S>3S-use PFV ABS POS.3S.IA-authority LOC ATTR-three and one.half year
A mouth was given to the beast to speak insolences and blasphemies and to use its authority for three-and-a-half years.
Comments
Similar to 4c and 4d above, the phrase "at its spine" introduces purpose clauses.
Here again, the passive is formed by simply not marking an ergative agent on the pronominal prefix for the verb give.
The original says 42 months. The year is the same length, but the Ic̣aa calendar does not divide the year into the same twelve months. I read somewhere that the number 3 1/2 is associated with the Devil, so it makes more sense to count the 42 months as three-and-a-half years in Ic̣aa'yanşi.
6
Sansunşip̣a fanşuxu 'u ŋkutaw ma ninsap̣ic̣aw sansu'yalu'a fanşu 'u Tyusu ŋkisu sansuunṭu fa anşu 'u ninsa-u'u myu ninsiŋkayawuṭu myu 'a'unsaa sansunsaḳa faa ma inḷi.
saⁿsu-ⁿʃiʘa fa-ⁿʃu-xu ʔu ⁿkutaw ma niⁿsa-ʘiǀaw saⁿsu-ʔjaluʔa faⁿʃu ʔu Tyusu ⁿkisu saⁿsu-uⁿṭu fa a-ⁿʃu ʔu niⁿsa-uʔu mju niⁿsi-ⁿkajaw-uǃu mju ʔa-ʔuⁿsaː saⁿsu-ⁿsaǂa faː ma iⁿǁi
3S>3S-open PFV-VOL-EXP ABS mouth LOC POS.3S.II-spine 3S>3S-blaspheme PFV-VOL ABS God and 3S>3S-slander do PFV-VOL ABS POS.3S.II-name and POS.3S.IA-holy-tent and ATTR-that.person 3P-dwell PFV LOC heaven
It opened its mouth to blaspheme God and to slander His name and his tabernacle and those that dwell in heaven.
Comments
- God: Dios (Spanish) > Tyusu
I was on the fence about how to deal with the term tabernacle. The Latin (tabernaculum) seems to be a translation of the Greek for tent, but that term has taken on a very specific meaning in Christianity. I went with a kinda-calque instead of importing the Spanish term, but I could see it going the other way too. I went ahead and put the Spanish-derived term tapaanaku in my lexicon as well.
7
7a
Niŋku'a faxu issi 'u 'aalasuu sawaup̣a 'u yawi myu sawap̣uiṭa.
ni-ⁿkuʔa fa-xu isːi ʔu ʔa-alasuː sawa-uʘa ʔu jawi mju sawa-ʘuiǃa
3S-give PFV-EXP DAT.3S ABS ATTR-permission 3S>3P-fight ABS holy.person and 3S>3P-conquer
To it was given the permission to fight the saints and conquer them.
Comments
The idea of "holy person" existed before the introduction of Christianity, and that term was applied to saints from other religions like Christianity or Buddhism.
7b
Ŋkisu niŋku'a faxu 'aalap̣ansuu sawaxulalaa'a 'u 'afianşi tanşi myu ic̣aa myu 'yanşi myu ŋkata.
ⁿkisu ni-ⁿkuʔa fa-xu ʔa-alaʘaⁿsuː sawa-xulalaːʔa ʔu ʔa-fiaⁿʃi taⁿʃi mju iǀaː mju ʔjaⁿʃi mju ⁿkata
and 3S-give PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-authority 3S>3P-rule ABS ATTR-all.quantity tribe and person and language and nation
And (to it) was given the authority to rule all of the tribes and persons and languages and nations.
8
8a
Xaansuiimaya faŋkwaxu 'u ŋkaansaa ŋi 'afinsaa nsaḳa ma ŋkamia,
xaːⁿsu-iːmaja faⁿkwaxu ʔu ⁿkaːⁿsaː ŋi ʔa-fiⁿsaː ∅-ⁿsaǂa ma ⁿkamia
3P>3S-worship PFV-WIL-EXP ABS beast ERG ATTR-all.anim PTCP-dwell.PFV LOC earth
All who lived on earth willingly worshipped the beast.
Comments
The term finsaa is actually means all animate things, but in this context it is clear that it is talking about people.
8b
'afinsaa nic̣aşa fama 'u u'u ma ninsinsassupanşiri amwauwixa tuusalŋii'a
ʔa-fiⁿsaː ni-ǀaʃa fa-ma ʔu uʔu ma niⁿsi-ⁿsasːu-paⁿʃiri ʔa-mwa-uwixa ∅-tuːsaluŋiːʔa
ATTR-all.anim 3P-write PFV-NEG ABS name LOC POS.3S.IA-life-book ATTR-child-sheep PTCP-die.CAUS.PFV
all whose names were not written in the book of life of the lamb which was killed
8c
ma ninsaitaw ŋkamiaŋkaanşi.
ma niⁿsa-itaw ⁿkamia-ⁿkaːⁿʃi
LOC POS.3S.II-foot world-creation
before the creation of the world.
Comments
This was a weird passage. Is "before the creation of the world" talking about the lamb's killing or the names being written. I'm pretty sure its talking about the names being written, but my historical biblical researching skills could very well be lacking. The phrase here could be interpreted either way.
The term for lamb comes from Spanish oveja. Spanish has a different word for lamb (cordero) which was used in at least one Mayan-language bible that I looked at. I thought about which term to import into Ic̣aa'yanşi. I figured oveja would be more commonly used in general life. There was already a prefix for "child/baby X" mwa-, so I went ahead and used oveja and tagged thonto the imported term uwixa to form lamb. However, I could also see cordero being imported for this specific religious meaning, kind of like tent vs. tabernacle above.
Kill is formed by the causative of to die. Like I said above, the passivization of this will come back to haunt me...
9
'A'unsaa ninşi faa 'u xantaw, sansuxaŋwa faŋkwantu.
ʔa-ʔuⁿsaː ni-ⁿʃi faː ʔu xaⁿtaw saⁿsu-xaŋwa faⁿkwaⁿtu
ATTR-that.person 3S-exist PFV ABS ear 3P>3S-hear PFV-WIL-IMP
People who have ears, let them hear.
Comments
With an optional marker on verbs to comment on the "willingness" of the doer, I figured the combination of willingness and imperative could work as a light command for "let them hear": "You should listen (willingly) to this."
10
10a
Ma ninsiwataw nimwifaṭa fayuntwa 'u wansaa
nimwifaṭa fayu.
ma niⁿsi-wataw ni-mwifaǃa fa-ju-ⁿtwa ʔu waⁿsaː
ni-mwifaǃa faju
LOC POS.3S.IA-arm 3S-capture PFV-NVOL-OBLG ABS any.anim,
3S-capture PFV-NVOL
If anyone must be captured,
they will be captured.
Comments
If/When clauses also use a body part: arms. Alienable possession for the arm is used for "if". Inalienable possession is used for "when".
10b
Ma ninsiwataw nituusaluŋiṭa faa 'u wansaa 'i aantu
nituusaluŋi fa'u wansaa 'i aantu.
ma niⁿsi-wataw ni-tuːsalu-ŋi-!a faː ʔu waⁿsaː ʔi aːⁿtu
ni-tuːsalu fa ʔu waⁿsaː ʔi aːⁿtu
LOC POS.3S.IA-arm 3S-die-CAUS-ANTI PFV ABS any.anim DAT sword,
3S-die PFV-NVOL ABS any.person DAT sword
If anyone kills with a sword
they will die by a sword.
Comments
This was a beast to translate. Causatives and instrumentals and passives and antipassives and multiple readings of the original Greek...?! What the hell is going on here?
First, apparently there are apparently multiple differring versions of this passage in the original Greek. So some versions say "those who kill by the sword..." and some say "those who are killed by the sword...". So this passage could be saying either "If you take up arms, then you will die" (i.e. don't go kill people) or "If you are destined to die, then you die." (i.e. your fate is already determined). I went with the first interpretation, as a warning not to take up arms.
Next, causatives and passives and ergativity... This is where I went back and forth about how to deal with passivization and I'm still not sure that I like where I landed.
To kill is formed by causitivizing to die:
- tusaluu'a: to die
- tusaluŋii'a: to kill (-ŋi- creates causatives)
Being a causative, it could be interpreted as "X made Y die". So is "X" (A) the killer or (B) the sword? Answer: Yes. (Aside: interesting paper on "causative-instrumental syncretism")
Sansutusaluŋi faa ŋi ic̣aa 'u aŋi.
sansu-tusalu-ŋi faː ŋi iǀaː ʔu aŋi
3S>3S-die-CAUS PFV ERG person ABS farmer
A person made the farmer die.
Sansutusaluŋi faa ŋi aantu 'u aŋi.
sansu-tusalu-ŋi faː ŋi aːⁿtu ʔu aŋi
3S>3S-die-CAUS PFV ERG sword ABS farmer
A sword made the farmer die.
So now how to make "A person made the farmer die with a sword" when I don't have a dedicated instrumental marker? For causativized transitives, the original agent gets demoted to a dative argument, so it makes sense to me to put the instrument by which this is happening in the dative as well.
Sansutusaluŋi faa ŋi ic̣aa 'u aŋi ʔi aantu.
sansu-tusalu-ŋi faː ŋi iǀaː ʔu aŋi ʔi aːⁿtu
3S>3S-die-CAUS PFV ERG person ABS farmer DAT sword
A person made the farmer die with a sword.
Passivizing that by dropping the ergative agent completely gives:
Nitusaluŋi faa 'u aŋi ʔi aantu.
ni-tusalu-ŋi faː ʔu aŋi ʔi aːⁿtu
3S-die-CAUS PFV ABS farmer DAT sword
The farmer died with(by) a sword.
Then I can use the antipassive to focus on the killer (and drop the now oblique farmer)
Nitusaluŋiṭa faa 'u ic̣aa ʔi aantu.
ni-tusalu-ŋi-!a faː ʔu iǀaː ʔi aːⁿtu
3S-die-CAUS-ANTIP PFV ABS person DAT sword
The person killed (something) with a sword.
Writing all that, now it looks like going from person who kills by the sword to person who dies by the sword is just a matter of causative + anti/passive. But getting there seemed a lot harder on my brain for some reason. It still seems like a lot of rigamarole that simply having a different root for killing would do away with.
But also, just re-reading what I wrote, I realized I could get a kind of applicative construction if I swap the killer and sword arguments:
Nitusaluŋiṭa faa 'u aantu ʔi ic̣aa.
ni-tusalu-ŋi-!a faː ʔu aːⁿtu ʔi iǀaː
3S-die-CAUS-ANTIP PFV ABS sword DAT person
The sword killed with the person. \ or \ A sword was used to kill by the person.
That's a definite maybe for me.
I feel like I need a passivization marker, rather than relying on the pronominal prefix. If there's an antipassive suffix, it seems like it would make sense to have a passive suffix as well. If anyone has any thoughts on that, I'd love to hear them.
Moving on...
10c
Ninşi fantwai ma 'iŋki 'u swaminṭuḳaŋkii''i myu swamiwi''i'amii'a yawi.
ni-ⁿʃi faⁿtwa-i ma ʔiⁿki ʔu swami-ⁿǃuǂaⁿkiːʔːi mju swami-wiʔːi-ʔamii'a jawi
3P-exist PFV-OBLG-EMPH LOC near.happening ABS POS.3P.IA-perseverance and POS.3P.IA-truth-believe holy.person
Perseverance and the faith of the saints must exist on this occassion.
11
11a
Ni'una faxu 'u 'aŋkaasaa nsansaa ma ninsauṭaw mutiaw.
ni-ʔuna faxu ʔu ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː ⁿsa.ⁿsaː ma niⁿsa-uǃaw mutiaw
3S-exit PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-beast second LOC POS.3S.II-belly earth
A second beast emerged from within the earth.
11b
Sii'u'uu'a faxu 'u 'ansansa 'arunşa mwauwixaŋi, ŋkima ni'ya 'afaxu turakuŋi.
siːʔu-ʔuːʔa fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿsaⁿsa ʔa-ruⁿʃa mwauwixa-ŋi, ⁿkima ni-ʔja ʔa-fa-xu turaku-ŋi
3D-curved.hanging PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-two ATTR-horn lamb-ISH, but 3S-speak ATTR-PFV-EXP dragon-ISH
Two horns like a lamb hung (from its head), but it spoke like the dragon.
Comments
Since sheep horns hang down and curve around, these horns have a different dispositional verb than the horns on the first beast.
12
12a
Sansunṭup̣a faxu 'u ninsialap̣ansuu ʔa-ŋkaansaa insaa ma ninsaşaasu.
saⁿsu-ⁿǃuʘa fa-xu ʔu niⁿsi-alaʘaⁿsuː ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː iⁿsaː ma niⁿsa-∅-ʃaːsu
3S>3S-use PFV-EXP ABS POS.3S.IA-authority ATTR-beast first LOC POS.3S.II-PTCP-stand.IPFV
It used the authority of the first beast in its stead.
12b
Ŋkisu sansuiimayaŋi faxu 'i nsaaanşi myu 'afinsaa ninsaḳa faa sama 'aŋkaansaa insaa, 'aŋkaansaa nirampwi faxu 'u 'aŋkaaşa xifinsa.
ⁿkisu saⁿsu-iːmaja-ŋi fa-xu ʔi ⁿsaːaⁿʃi mju ʔa-fiⁿsaː ni-ⁿsaǂa faː sama ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː iⁿsaː, ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː ni-raⁿpwi fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿkaːʃa ∅-xifiⁿsa
and 3S>3S-worship-CAUS PFV-EXP DAT world.anim and ATTR-all.anim 3S-dwell PFV LOC.3S ABS ATTR-beast first, ATTR-beast 3S-heal PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-wound PTCP-live.CESS
and it made the world and all who live in it worship the first beast, the beast with the fatal wound which had healed.
13
And it performed great signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to the earth in full view of the people.
Sawafa axu 'u 'aalaŋi''i ŋkaa'a, sii sansu'una 'unṭuḳa faxu 'u yaytaw ma inta myu mutiaw ma 'a'umma xaansuawa fawaxu ŋi finsaa.
sawa-fa a-xu ʔu ʔa-alaŋiʔʔi ⁿkaːʔa, siː saⁿsu-ʔuna ʔuⁿǃuǂa fa-xu ʔu jajtaw ma iⁿta mju mutiaw ma ʔa-ʔumːa xaːⁿsu-awa fawaxu ŋi fiⁿsaː
3S>3P-do PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-sign great, even 3S>3S-exit motion-CAUS PFV-EXP ABS fire LOC sky and earth LOC ATTR-that.place 3P>3S-see PFV-POT ERG all.people
It did great signs; it even made fire move from the sky to the earth where everyone could see.
Comments
One of my goals is to minimize prepositions. Right now I just have one generic locative preposition, and whether it means to or from or whatever is gleaned from the rest of the clause.
I ran into a problem with this verse. The fire travels from the sky to the earth. That's two different interpretations of the locative marker ma in one clause. If I simply used "ma A and B", I think it would be unclear which direction the fire was moving in. It would be more like moving between the two points, maybe going one way, maybe the other, maybe going back and forth.
I didn't want to make a new preposition, though, so I put that directional meaning in the verb. The verb for motion used here clearly means to move from a source to a destination. A single locative argument would be interpreted as the destination, but two would be interpreted as from source to destination.
14
14a
Ma ninsiwitaw 'aalaŋi''i niyawŋaṭa nsa 'u sawafaa'a ma ninsaşaasu 'aŋkaansaa insaa, sawamwifala faxu 'u 'afinsaa nsaḳa ma mutiaw.
ma niⁿsi-witaw ʔa-alaŋiʔʔi ni-jawŋaǃa ⁿsa ʔu sawa-faːʔa ma niⁿsa-ʃaːsu ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː iⁿsaː, sawa-mwifala fa-xu ʔu ʔa-fiⁿsaː ∅-ⁿsaǂa ma mutiaw
LOC POS.3P.II-face ATTR-sign 3S-prohibit CESS ABS 3S>3P-do.PFV LOC POS.3S.II-stand.IPFV ATTR-beast first, 3S>3P-deceive PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-all.anim PTCP-dwell.PFV LOC earth
Because of the signs that stopped being prohibited to do in the first beast's stead, it deceived all people living on earth.
Comments
The relative clause for the signs was a little tricky since signs was embedded a couple of layers down. It took me a while to figure out the different clauses and their ergative/absolutive relationships.
I'm on the fence about having "permit/allow" be the cessative aspect of prohibit. I think it works conceptually, since permission implies that the actor was prohibited from doing the action otherwise. But I still don't know if I like it as the main way of saying "to permit".
14b
Sansuxuḷia fa axu swa'i 'u ŋkuu'a 'u 'aissaşa 'aŋkaansaa ninşi faxu 'u 'aŋkaaşa aantu 'i''i nixifi faa.
saⁿsu-xuǁia fa axu swaʔi ʔu ⁿkuːʔa ʔu ʔa-isːaʃa ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː ni-ⁿʃi fa-xu ʔu ʔa-ⁿkaːʃa aːⁿtu ʔiʔːi ni-xifi faː
3S>3S-command do PFV-EXP DAT.3P ABS to.make ABS ATTR-image ATTR-beast 3S-exist PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-wound sword yet 3S-live PFV
It commanded to them to make images of the beast that had a sword wound yet lived.
15
Niyawŋaṭa nsaxu 'u sansunta aa'a ŋi 'aŋkaansaa nsansaa 'u nsassu ma 'aissaşa 'aŋkaansaa insaa, ma ninsap̣ic̣aw ni'ya fawa 'u issaşa ŋkisu sawatuusaluŋi faa 'u 'afinsaa xaansuiimaya faŋkuma 'u 'aissaşa ŋkaansaa.
nijawŋaǃa ⁿsa-xu ʔu saⁿsuⁿta aːʔa ŋi ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː ⁿsaⁿsaː ʔu ⁿsasːu ma ʔa-isːaʃa ʔa-ⁿkaːⁿsaː iⁿsaː, ma niⁿsa-ʘiǀaw ni-ʔja fawa ʔu isːaʃa ⁿkisu sawa-tuːsaluŋi faː ʔu ʔa-fiⁿsaː xaːⁿsu-iːmaja faⁿkuma ʔu ʔa-isːaʃa ⁿkaːⁿsaː
3S-prohibit CESS-EXP ABS 3S>3S-blow motion.inward.PFV ERG ATTR-beast second ABS breath LOC ATTR-image ATTR-beast first, LOC POS.3S.II-spine 3S-speak PFV-POT ABS image and 3S>3P-die-CAUS PFV ABS ATTR-all.anim 3P>3S-worship PFV-GIVO-NEG ABS ATTR-image beast
It was permitted for the second beast to blow breath into the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and kill all who did not worship the image of the beast.
Comments
With all the causatives and passives in this verse, I'm just gonna pray I got them all right.
16
Sawaxi yu fanşuxu 'i finsaa, 'i 'aic̣aa ŋkaa'a myu c̣ii'a, 'i ulakkii myu ŋip̣akkii, 'i xuli myu ŋkii'i 'u affaṭu ma swama'aiḷu naanşi nsi swamasip̣wa,
sawa-xi ju faⁿʃuxu ʔi fiⁿsaː, ʔi ʔa-iǀaː ⁿkaːʔa mju ǀiːʔa, ʔi ulakkii mju ŋip̣akkii, ʔi xuli mju ⁿkiːʔi ʔu afːaǃu ma swama-ʔa-iǁu naːⁿʃi ⁿsi swama-siʘwa
3S>3P-receive motion.down-CAUS PFV-VOL-EXP DAT all.anim, DAT ATTR-people great and small, DAT wealthy and poor, DAT ATTR-master and servant ABS mark LOC POS.3P.II-ATTR-hand right or POS.3P.II-forehead
It made all people, people great and small, the rich and the poor, masters and servants, receive a mark on their right hands or their foreheads.
Comments
The Latin clearly mentions free people and slaves, not master and servant. While someone could serve another person, the Ic̣aa did not own people. The possessive forms differentiate animacy, and saying "my servant" in the same way you would say "my land" would be ungrammatical and weird. Since the point of this verse is EVERYBODY got this mark, using master and servant fits the vibe well enough.
17
Ŋkisu sansufa axu 'u 'a'unşuu sansu'imufaṭa fawama nsi sansuŋkuwwaṭa fawama 'u 'anşuunsaa ninşi fama 'u 'aaffaṭu ninsau'u ŋkaansaa nsi ninsansayu u'u.
ⁿkisu saⁿsu-fa a-xu ʔu ʔa-ʔuⁿʃuː saⁿsu-ʔimufa!a fawama ⁿsi saⁿsu-ⁿkuwːa!a fawama ʔu ʔa-ⁿʃuːⁿsaː ni-ⁿʃi fama ʔu ʔa-afːaǃu niⁿsa-uʔu ⁿkaːⁿsaː ⁿsi niⁿsa-ⁿsaju uʔu
and 3S>3S-do PFV-EXP ABS ATTR-that.manner 3P-buy-ANTIP PFV-POT-NEG or 3P-sell-ANTIP PFV-POT-NEG ABS ATTR-no.anim 3S-exist PFV-NEG ABS ATTR-mark POS.3S.II-name beast or POS.3S.II-number name
And it made it so that no one who did not not have the mark of the name of the beast or the number of its name could buy or sell.
18
18a
Niuuala''i 'u 'iŋki.
ni-uːalaʔːi ʔu ʔiⁿki
3S-wisdom ABS this.thing
This is wisdom.
18b
Sansuntwansa faŋkwantu ŋi 'aic̣aa alanşiri 'u ninsansayu ŋkaansaa.
saⁿsu-ⁿtwaⁿsa fa-ⁿkwa-ⁿtu ŋi ʔa-iǀaː alaⁿʃiri ʔu niⁿsa-ⁿsaju ⁿkaːⁿsaː
3S>3S-calculate PFV-WIL-IMP ERG ATTR-person intellect ABS POS.3S.II-number beast
Let a person of intellect calculate the number of the beast.
18c
Nininsansayu ic̣aa.
ni-niⁿsa-ⁿsaju iǀaː
3S-POS.3S.II-number person
It is a person's number.
18c
Ninsansa nsiişu ralişu raansa 'u nsayu.
ni-ⁿsaⁿsa ⁿsiːʃu raliʃu raːⁿsa ʔu ⁿsaju
3S-2 256 144 10 ABS number
The number is 29A.
Comments
So there it is! 29A -- the number of the beast in base 16. Sure, you could convert 666 to base 16 in a simple google search but you didn't! You went through an entire chapter of Revelation in a conlang to get to it!
But...is that really the number...?
Apparently there are two main schools of thought on what 666 actually means: * historic: 666 is the gematria value of Emperor Nero's name * symbolic: 7 is a good number, so 6 is incomplete. 777 is used in the bible to symbolize God's perfection, so 666 is a symbol of imperfection/evil.
I went with the historic view because it let me play with bases (and because of Morgan Freeman's awesome reaction at about 2:55). The symbolic approach would have just repeated 6 in Ic̣aa'yanşi: nsiilju nsiilju nsiilju.
Base 20: 1D6 (400 + 260 + 6)
Being part of the Mesoamerican Language Area, it also makes sense to have a base-20 system available. Since the native Ic̣aa'yanşi base is 16, I think they would import words from other base-20 languages that they came in contact with. So for now I went with Mayan (Classical Ch'olti') terms for 20 and 400.
pa uunsa kaw nsiilyu
pa uːⁿsa kaw ⁿsiːlju
400 13*20 6
- 400: bak (Classical Ch'olti') > pa
- 20: kal (Classical Ch'olti') > kaw
Base 10: 666
Looking at some of the Mayan-language translations of the bible, I saw the Spanish word for hundred used. I thought this would be a good time to see how a base-10 system might look for that classic 666:
nsiilyusyantu nsiilyutyasa nsiilyu
ⁿsiːlju-sjaⁿtu ⁿsiːlju-tjasa ⁿsiːlju
6-100 6-10 6
- 100: ciento > syantu
- 10: diez > tyasa
Wrapup
If you made it all the way here, thank you for reading!
I think I need to work on passivization strategies a little more, but overall I'm happy how this turned out.
This made me want to look a little more into power sturctures, giving and receiving power, permitting and prohibiting actions, etc. Is power alienable or is it something inherent to us? Not simply on a linguistic level but on a conceptual or artistic level -- what does dealing with power mean for this language. There are very real, personal reasons that I went with an ergative alignment and distinguishing animacy in possession. I think dealing with power now might merit the same kind of thought.
Thanks again for reading!