tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 16 07:51:59 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: more beginner drivel ;)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: more beginner drivel ;)
- Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 10:51:53 EST
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "A.Appleyard" at Jan 16, 95 4:07 am
According to A.Appleyard:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jan 1995, William H. Martin wrote:
> > ... "If it is impossible that you defeat your enemy, then you must accompany
> > him in battle." The only shady part of this is the implied
> > generic "it"...
>
> R.B.Franklin replied:-
>
> > There appears to be at least one canon example of the implied, generic >
> > "it" in Klingon: Do'Ha'. (It is unfortunate.)
>
> The real meaning is "If (you defeating your enemy in battle) is impossible
> ..", and there is really no "it" involved. "defeating" is the subject of
> "is", a noun, i.e. a gerund alias infinitive, which also has its own subject
> and object.
Note that you are implying a Sentence As Subject construction
here, which Klingon does not allow. That is why I cast it as
"If IT is impossible THAT you defeat your enemy..." The {'e'}
pronoun can only act as OBJECT of its associated verb, as it
represents the previous sentence. You've used it as the SUBJECT
of the verb, while placing it in the object position, which is
why you need the generic "it" to cover the subject position.
This is why I have little faith in this particular usage of the
generic "it". I don't think it is that easy to create a
Sentence As Subject construction. Instead, I think what you
want is a simple {jaghlIj DacharghlaHbe'chugh vaj DamuvnIS}.
Sounds like one of the Ferrengi rules of acquisition to me, of
course referring to business mergers being preferable to
bankruptsy. It most definitely does not sound Klingon.
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |