"Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani."

Translation:Kaʻiulani bakes bread.

December 4, 2018

This discussion is locked.


I've said it before and will say it again ... this program would be immensely improved if they would provide a link to a few pages of basic grammar. The basic order of verb/subject/object clearly has exceptions, but they certainly aren't obvious ...


I had the exact question about VSO (in fact I was trying to figure out how to look up vso on my phone to make sure it wasn't VOS!

[deactivated user]

    That Puhi palaoa is a stumper. If this were a class inclusion pattern, "Kaʻiulani is a bread baker," I think it would be He puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani. Or instead, if it were an equational pattern, ʻO Kaʻiulani ke puhi palaoa, would be "Kaʻiulani is the bread baker." Itʻs not those two. What sentence pattern is Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani? Iʻm so confused. Here, palaoa clarifies what kind of baking K. does, like an adverb.

    And, for Kaʻiulani bakes bread from English to Hawaiian, DL accepted Puhi ʻo Kaʻiulani i ka palaoa as well as Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani. Is the point of these two sentences to demonstrate two different ways/patterns to express the same idea? Ideas, anyone?


    i have a more recent educated guess, but i can't be sure either. It seems that "puhi palaoa" is here a compound VERB. It can mean "bread-baking". So the literal translation is "ka'iulani bread-bakes" therefore "he bakes bread". I am not sure if we have met such compound verbs before, or even if Hawaiian has such verbs, but for now it seems the most satisfying explanation.

    Until some fluent speaker verifies this.


    Ding ding ding! I think you nailed it! It's a compound verb :)


    I'm not fully educated but I have learnt that nouns and adjectives can be verbs in Hawaiian.

    So I read the sentence "Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani" as literally meaning in English "Kaʻiulani bread-bakes"

    "Puhi ʻo Kaʻiulani i ka palaoa" is also correct for the English sentence.

    I personally think that there is difference between those hawaiian sentences. "Puhi ʻo Kaʻiulani i ka palaoa" tells clearly that (WHAT is Kaʻiulani baking for) only, so "bread" in the sentence is emphasized.

    While "Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani" emphasizes that (what is she DOING) and (WHAT is she baking for). So if someone tells that sentences, she/he wants emphasize (baking) and (bread) together.

    It may be incorrect. But I appreciate someone who is fluent in Hawaiian can explain that clearer.


    In the Hawaiian language textbook Na Kai 'Ewalu, emphasis within a sentence is created by moving the emphasized thing forward.


    Why is there no "i" as an object marker before palaoa in this case?


    Please see my reply to rabelon


    So Hawaiian does have incorporation after all. For me as a linguist this is interesting to know. :)


    What does "incorporation" mean, as used by a linguist? Thanks!


    Incorporation means (in this context) that what is normally the object of the verb is actually made part of a compound verb. In Hawaiian the object noun becomes a "kāhulu," which I think of (rightly or wrongly) as an adverb. Often the incorporation will change the overall meaning, often in the more generalized direction. Note the two sentences:

    Puhi ʻo Kaʻiulani i ka palaoa. -> Kaʻiulani is baking the bread; maybe right now but just like today or this weekend or before the party.

    Puhi palaoa ʻo Kaʻiulani. -> Kaʻiulani bakes bread; that's what she does, it's her hobby.

    I don't think this is a cast-in-stone thing, but it's my understanding that it's generally true.


    I agree with the person above. Why not "the bread"


    Because there is no "ka" or "he" in the prompt.


    Not needed if we go with the compound verb theory that was posted above, by Zabrunga. That sounds right to me, anyway.

    Learn Hawaiian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.