jē sōta ñe


jē sōta ñe

This means “instead of” or “in place of”. It consists of the versatile preposition plus a defective noun related to the stem –sōþ– (seen in jasōþa “place”) plus the comparative ñe.

Sentence #42:
ñi sāen rā jatarūna jawēha jēwāri anhāri tō tema jakīña ien ñi jahēŋŋūn jakewōra jē sōta ñe ñi sāen rā jāllōhen;
He went to the waters of the mirage lakes, for he wished to quench his thirst rather than go to the feast.

hi … hi


hi … hi

We’re on sentence 11 of the LCC4 relay text and the woman is still speaking:

hi pa riēn ancē hi serle jāo cī;

Here are two clauses conjoined with the coordinating conjunction hihi. This indicates that the first clause is a supposition: “you have the ability” and the second clause is a result of that supposition: “you tell it to me.” So, “If you have the ability, then tell it to me.”

Note also that the woman is using which is not an imperative but a hortative. This is because it is considered impolite to use the actual imperative.




The third sentence of the 2nd Inverse Relay text:

la jalāeþa jarōllōl ewaþ ñi liēþ rā jalāe ālme;

ewaþ is a conjunction joining the la clause and the ñi clause. It means something like “yet” or “but”. So the interpretation of the la clause really is “The mountain pass is covered with snow, but…” and then the ñi clause.

The ñi clause is straight-forward. liēþ, as discussed before, is the first person plural exclusive pronoun. rā jalāe ālme is a locative phrase meaning “across the mountain”.

la jalāeþa jarōllōl ewaþ ñi liēþ rā jalāe ālme;
The mountain pass is covered with snow, but we cross the mountain.




The fourth line of the LCC3 Relay Text:

se jīxōsa cī ānen anwālte annāra il anpēxeni ī ñi rūjapēxa;

ī is one of those particles that can mean several things. As a conjunction, it means “and also”. As a clause-level modifier, it means “again, also”. If this is the conjunction ī then this sentence has to mean, “Let’s passionately look back in final moments and also (they) move away.” Hmm. If this is the clause-level modifier ī, then the sentence can mean “Let’s passionately look back again in final moments (as) (they) move away.” if ī is modifying the first clause, or “Let’s passionately look back (as) the final (waves) again move away.” if ī is modifying the second clause. Personally, I like the last interpretation, but they are all valid.

la liēn sū anālhāri anālri jahāwa ñi antāoni anhūwi rūjapēxa;
la jāo pa anhē ja ñi antāoni antāλi rūjapēxa;
ñi nāra lemōra ñi antāoni antāλi rūjapēxa;
se jīxōsa cī ānen anwālte annāra il anpēxeni ī ñi rūjapēxa;

I am at the edge of the stormy sea and the breaking waves move away.
This is good, that the wild waves move away.
All my dreams become the wild waves moving away.
Let’s passionately look back as the final waves again move away.

tō jāo … tō


tō jāo … tō

The last sentence (number eleven) of the Babel text:

tō jāo sete sawēra λi waxāon tō sū āke ōrra ñamma anwaxāon tō antaxōni tēna ā λi ārōn;

Kēlen has several coordinating conjunctions. tō jāo is one of them, though it is nearly interchangeable with several non-coordinating conjunctions, such as which signals a reason and tō tūaþ which signals intent. tō jāo and its alternates tō jāo and tō jāo signal a consequence and is often translated “so” or “therefore” and could be translated “consequently”. The instrumental marker used with ñi is also . Sentence eleven deals with the consequences of the Lord’s wrath, and so:

“Therefore (tō jāo) their name is Waxāon [Confusion] because () there the Lord made confusion of ( as instrument) all the languages.”

And that’s it for the Babel text. Tune in tomorrow for something else.


We’re on sentence 6 of the Babel text:

il aþ ñi λi ārōn rā āke tō sema mo sarōña jamāonre nīkan jakōnōr ja ōrra ñatta;

is in many ways similar to tō tūaþ in that it also conjoins clauses, signalling that the second clause is a consequence of the first clause. tō tūaþ specifically signals intended effect; signals a reason.

“And then the Lord went there to…”

tō tūaþ


tō tūaþ

Continuing from yesterday on the fifth sentence of the Babel text:

ē teteñ ien hēja ñanna lewēra tō tūaþ wā ñi ñēim makkepōlien rā anmārwi āñ pēxa;

tō tūaþ conjoins clauses and signals that a reason is to follow. I tend to translate this as “in order to” or “in order that”.




is a comparative. By itself it expresses an inexact equivalence. So jacālmi ñe jakīþi is “bricks as stones” and ancēwri ñe anhērmi “mud as mortar”, meaning here that the one substance is used in place of the other.

ē teteñ ien
hēja ñanna jacālmi jajūti nā
aþ te sāim nīkan jacālmi ñe jakīþi
aþ te sāim nīkan ancēwri ñe anhērmi;

And they to each other (said)
we should make many baked bricks
and te they with bricks as stones
and te they with mud as mortar

ē … ē

ee ee

ē … ē

This is another coordinating conjunction and means simply ‘and’. This also allows us to complete the second clause of the Kēlen rephrasal of the 1st article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Wait, you say, what about lenārre and lewēren. Those are simply the first person possessed forms of senārre and sewēren, which I already discussed when covering body parts.

The second clause:

pa ñēim tēna ē lenārre ē lewēren
because PA we each and soul and identity
Because we each of us have soul and identity…

Our progress:
tō la mēli manaren tēna ñe anhēnārīki anīλi jañāona jañēie
‘Because each person is an equal thread in the cloth of society…’
tō pa ñēim tēna ē lenārre ē lewēren
‘Because we each of us have soul and identity…’
tō jāo hēja senneñ anēla anciēri ke mān mo mīþa
ien sexe mo maþūskīri mo sāim maþūskīriēma cī;