I have talked to Paarthurnax about this and I am curious as to what the community thinks about this? An example of this concept: In Latin there are "ablative absolutes" which are phrases used when a thought, condition or action is grammatically separate but modifies the meaning of the rest of the sentence. Ex: Nuntio misso, dux dormivit per nocte. This would be translated as "A messenger having been sent, the general slept through the night." We use the construction "___ having been ___" to translate the foreign concept of an ablative absolute into english. So take all the issuses with traslating Dovahzul, such as no passive voice or distinction of specific verb tenses. Things that are found in all joor languages, with out the expression of ideas is severely limited. This can make it awkward when translating into Dovahzul and difficult to deturmin the full ideas of a passage when transating into an joor language. What ideas for possible constructions do you all have?

I'll share some of my thoughts here, since I think they're important for determining what "fluency" really means. When working between languages, the goal is obviously to find a way to convey the same information, but I think it's important to accept that it might have to be done through syntax or tense that differs from the original. Otherwise, it's square pegs versus round holes situation.

In the sentence "A messenger having been sent, the general slept through the night," I would say there are three important pieces of information:

• A messenger was sent
• The general slept through the night
• The general slept through the night because a messenger was sent

When you pick apart the information this way, it becomes easier to figure out how to express it in Dovahzul without being fixed on using similar syntax or similar verb tense as the original English sentence. Here's my translation:

Voth funrahiik ruz komeyt drey faal kinbokein siiv praan zein vulon. "With a messenger then issued/dispatched did the general find rest through the night."

Here we get the same information, but worded in a way that's natural for Dovahzul rather than trying to make Dovahzul behave like another language.

paarthurnax

I'll share some of my thoughts here, since I think they're important for determining what "fluency" really means. When working between languages, the goal is obviously to find a way to convey the same information, but I think it's important to accept that it might have to be done through syntax or tense that differs from the original. Otherwise, it's square pegs versus round holes situation.

In the sentence "A messenger having been sent, the general slept through the night," I would say there are three important pieces of information:

• A messenger was sent
• The general slept through the night
• The general slept through the night because a messenger was sent

When you pick apart the information this way, it becomes easier to figure out how to express it in Dovahzul without being fixed on using similar syntax or similar verb tense as the original English sentence. Here's my translation:

Voth funrahiik ruz komeyt drey faal kinbokein siiv praan zein vulon. "With a messenger then issued/dispatched did the general find rest through the night."

Here we get the same information, but worded in a way that's natural for Dovahzul rather than trying to make Dovahzul behave like another language.

That makes sence but I'm not refering to "fluency" here i had used the word before incorectly, for lack of a better term. I'm just saying that the idea of having constructions for foreign concepts Could be beneficial to the language. This was me just trying to see other's opinions/prospecives on the issue. Looking back at the lack of a passive voice A way of translating a passive voice verb from (insert language here) to Dovahzul would be useful.