tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 14 07:49:19 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: What's wrong with "which"?

According to Alan Anderson:
> 
> ~mark wrote:
> > Are you asking about the well-known problem of how to say "which of"?
> 
> Yes, that's the original discussion.  {nuq} comes close, but leaves a lot of
> ambiguity.  Does {jIlo' tajmey nuq} mean "what/which knife do I use?" or does
> it mean "what [part] of the knives do I use?"  Since "which" implies one of a
> limited choice of answers, yoDtargh suggested {*nuqDIch}.  It is completely
> non-canon, but it has a certain charm.  Can someone compile a list of things
> to take to the qep'a' wish-list/brainstorm session?  I won't be there, and I
> think {*nuqDIch} should be considered.
> 
> -- ghunchu'wI'

Well, it's not like we can decide anything the likes of
accepting *nuqDIch at qep'a'. We can discuss it and hope that
our limited communication with Okrand eventually conveys this
interest.

I'd also like to put in a plug for my own solution to the
"which" problem which should serve well in the interim
regardless of Okrand's eventual decision because it uses the
current resources of the language without making up any new
useage of words.

I change the question into a command. After all, when I ask you
which knife I should use, I'm really commanding you to choose
the knife that I will use. taj vIlo'bogh yIwIv! It is changing
what was originally posed as a question into a command, but it
really is not changing the MEANING at all, and it completely
uses acceptable Klingon grammar and vocabulary.

Eventually, Okrand will pronounce the BEST way to do this.
Meanwhile, I suggest that this method is the only irrefutably
correct and acceptable way to translate the question word
"which" pertaining to memebers of a list.

charghwI'
-- 

 \___
 o_/ \
 <\__,\
  ">   | Get a grip.
   `   |

Back to archive top level