Learn Mando'a

To be totally honest, I don't know if this would go here or in the culture section.
The Linguistic relativity principle (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity), also known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, discusses the relationship between thought and language: specifically the concept a person cannot express or understand because their language or the one they're translating into doesn't have the words to express it.
I'm curious to hear how you think this would play out in Mando'a.

It already does, it's a nightmare.
I'm working on the Bible translation project.
'Holy'? Nada.
'Angel'? You've got to be kidding.
'God'? Technically there is one but it takes about a paragraph in Mando'a to approximate three characters in English.
Oh, and any form of thought-process verb? Forget it. Either Mandos don't think, or it doesn't occur to them that that's what they're doing. A Mando'a philosopher would be scuppered. 'Realize'. 'Consider'. 'Imagine'.

I haven't studied Mando'a as long as Bellandrie, but I agree. Mando'a is a language that has become highly specialized (in that universe) and as a result certain things that other cultures have words for are missing in mando'a. Apparently they never had a renaissance.
this is actually something I love about languages, as to fully understand the language you have to understand the culture. certain idioms, direct translations, etc. don't make sense unless viewed through the culture. I mean, who needs to know whether you stabbed someone with a small skinny knife, a bes'kad, or a long broad knife? And yet mando'a has words for each of those things, which is a big culture statement right there IMO

Belandrie Meave wrote:It already does, it's a nightmare.
I'm working on the Bible translation project.

I would LOVE to hear more about this. If it's helpful in any way, I do know where to find Acts and I think all the Gospels in Elvish- just to see how someone else worked with that. Are you translating from English to Mando'a or from Hebrew and Greek to Mando'a?

I think, for an in-universe example, the relationship between Jedi would be difficult for Mando'ade to describe; they'd refer to a master as a father/ mother, for instance, and probably struggle to comprehend the idea that someone raising and teaching a child wasn't a parent. In our universe there might be a similar issue with blended families.

Theoretically, considering the importance of family in Mando culture, there should be a number of concepts related to that without a direct translation. We have a few, but there would likely be more, I think.

It's here... viewtopic.php?f=21&t=34
Kensoku started on Genesis, I started on Luke, taking a slightly different approach as you'll see. It's pretty slow, and technically I'm paraphrasing, as I'm going from an NIV into Mando'a. Putting up the literal meaning of my 'translation' as I go.
Oddly enough that particular example hasn't been a huge issue. I'm Jedi myself (Jedi and Christian first, Mando second), so obviously I take an interest in it. Talk to Tempest or Taljair, or get hold of Taljair's copy of the dictionary (there's a nice preface on Mando'a culture) but really, nobody blinks twice at the idea of blended families, or people raising a child that isn't their own biological offspring. Aliit ori'shya tal'din, and all that. A Jedi Padawan speaking Mando'a would cheerfully refer to their Master as 'buir', because that specific word connotes (so far as I can see) an interpersonal relationship, rather than a genetic one. See also, 'Kar'buir'.
Ruus is having you on, he's been here much longer than I have, I just pick things up quickly.

I meant more along the lines of which parents in a blended family get "custody."

On a totally different note: since food is divided so clearly into 'this is what you eat in the field' and 'this is what you eat at home' that the word "perishable" doesn't exist in and of itself, so it might take some explaining to be able to get a Mando from that word to the the concept of 'you can't carry this in your backpack,' not because they don't understand that food can go bad, but just because of how they sort it mentally. If that makes any sense.

Certain gender roles would probably go over a Mando's head, especially any idea that a woman should be quiet and passive. Same thing with racism/speciesism.

Racism may not exist in the Mando'a thoughtspace, but nationalism certainly does. Mandos use the same word (aruetii) for "traitor," "foreigner," and "outsider," with linguistic ties to "enemy" (aru'e). If memory serves, some interpretations of the Resol'nare require that armor be worn in public, and that Mando'a not be spoken where non-Mandos can easily hear it. They're not exactly trusting people. Or perhaps more accurately, their trust is not easily earned.

There seem to be three basic categories a person can fall into: outsider, Mandalorian, or family. This is more on the cultural side than linguistic, but while it's difficult to move up from one category to another, doing so generally seems to gain you a degree of implicit trust that isn't shared by many cultures.

On the speciesist side, a highly insulting word that means "coward" (hut'uun) appears somewhat similar to the word Hutt. I wonder how a Mando would react to the idea of a Hutt Mando'ade?

I think that would follow what you say: if you're Mando'ade, that's enough. You're in.

Something I just remembered I wanted to mention here:
The word "udesii" is translated "calm down/ relax." Typically, what we mean when we say "relax" is "a state without worry or concern." That's not practical or safe for our Mando'ade pals, nor would they likely enjoy it. I think it's more likely that they use "udesii" to mean a state where someone is focused on what's important (be that their mission on the battlefield or their time with their family) at the moment and can do their tasks well.

Also, discussion question: Do you think Mandalorians are an individualist or collectivist culture? Explain. Use 400-600 word, cite your sources in APA format.

Rangir ti APA bal rangir bal ORI'rangir ti MLA.

I'd say it depends on era, and how strict you want to be about definitions.

Early crusaders, as well as the later ones, were very fond of individualism in small things, as well as the early crusaders being fond of individual glory, but in all eras they were very loyal to the clan, and to the overarching culture. If you want to call the social obligation to provide for family, (though it's an individual's business who that is to them), as being collectivist, then yes. But I'd say they focus more on freedom than obligation, though that may be colored by my own bias.

And meanwhile, the neocrusaders were incredibly, almost fanatically collectivist.

For Modern mandos i.e. movie times, I would say they were mostly collective. They have some individuals who branch out on their own, but the majority of them seem to value a collective spirit. This makes sense to me, because if you're a soldier then it really helps to have a small army comprised of your family and friends who all depend on each other.

When you reply, I want the sources cited in Chicago.

Ruus wrote: When you reply, I want the sources cited in Chicago.

(Ruus, 2016)

I asked this question because I'm considering their approach on and ideas about mental illness. Even the engineering students at my school don't use Chicago, and I'm a PSYCH MAJOR. Heck no (Hansen, 2016).

Well, at least based on Fi's experience, they seem pretty caring with people with mental disabilities. Not sure how far that extends, but it's certainlly not a cold shoulder.

Vlet Hansen wrote:Well, at least based on Fi's experience, they seem pretty caring with people with mental disabilities. Not sure how far that extends, but it's certainlly not a cold shoulder.

I mean more their models for mental illness and what sorts of disorders their culture experiences. For example, PTSD. This is a culture where a significant portion of their population are professional soldiers, and obviously there's burnout and trauma. But the symptoms could look totally different from what we tend to think of: hypervigilance, for instance, is likely common among non-pathological individuals, it would hardly be considered abnormal. There's also the question of how it's viewed: do Mandalorians see PTSD as a lifelong struggle, or as a sign of weakness, or just needing a break from fighting, or something cyclic that everyone experiences once in a while? That's going to change how it manifests.

I personally can't see them viewing it as a weakness. Certainly not the entire culture. Perhaps some of the more unpleasant hardliner groups in the culture, maybe. But as a whole that just seems off to me. My gut goes for cyclic, but then that is based mostly on my bias for cyclical perceptions of things more than anything else.

As someone who suffers from OCD of the pure-obsessional variety, I can certainly see that disorder being a problem. Intrusive thoughts are a motherfucker and a half and they just ADORE anything stressful.

I'm not certain as to how they'd view it and mental illness as a whole though. My preferred way of viewing it, for like my fanfictions and shit, is I WILL LITERALLY FIGHT MY MIND. I say that as a mentally ill individual who can't fight wars physically. Instead I'm at war with myself. Combat and the struggle to survive doesn't necessarily always mean physically fighting for me. It's how I conceive of at least part of the Fiandecht, the Warrior Path, with my religion Gaelic Polytheism. As well as dealings with the more war gody gods of the group like the Morrígan. She doesn't ask that I go and get in the military because first off I can't do that at all. But she does ask that I am at constant war with myself. I'm surrounded by enemies on all sides and those enemies are all of my own making and I'm not dying here, dammit. That all ending up inspiring how I handle it in my writing about Mandos. Though I'm not sure how that would even be conveyed in the language given how few words there are for thinky personal introspection type things. Granted, I guess one could turn towards the more direct, fighty words that do exist for dealing with talking about mental illness in this case.

As far as Hutt Mando that I can see as being something that would not go over well with many. It'd be perplexing and highly suspect at best for many, I feel. Though I imagine at least someone out there would be very adamant that no my space slug brother is totes Mando and I will fucking fight you over this.

Aarlaya wrote:

Vlet Hansen wrote:Well, at least based on Fi's experience, they seem pretty caring with people with mental disabilities. Not sure how far that extends, but it's certainlly not a cold shoulder.

I mean more their models for mental illness and what sorts of disorders their culture experiences. For example, PTSD. This is a culture where a significant portion of their population are professional soldiers, and obviously there's burnout and trauma. But the symptoms could look totally different from what we tend to think of: hypervigilance, for instance, is likely common among non-pathological individuals, it would hardly be considered abnormal. There's also the question of how it's viewed: do Mandalorians see PTSD as a lifelong struggle, or as a sign of weakness, or just needing a break from fighting, or something cyclic that everyone experiences once in a while? That's going to change how it manifests.

I would say that Kal Skirata was getting pretty burned out and most of the clones were in various stages of PTSD. Everyone seemed to think that this was expected and that people would need to be taken care of. I can see attitudes varying from individual to individual, but as a whole I expect that they would try to make sure those people got the care and support they needed. Vode an, after all.

I'm personally a fan of the cyclic view myself.

So looking at the themes in these answers, and considering the concept of the Manda, I'm seeing their culture as one where individuals see themselves as part of a system and can't divorce themselves from that idea that their actions influence others.

Aarlaya wrote:I'm personally a fan of the cyclic view myself.

So looking at the themes in these answers, and considering the concept of the Manda, I'm seeing their culture as one where individuals see themselves as part of a system and can't divorce themselves from that idea that their actions influence others.

Sounds right to me. If you're part of a squad where a deviation from the plan can kill everyone, I think that that mindset would stick with you.

I support this discussion. Just wanted to chime in and say it has been a very entertaining and thought-provoking read.