tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jun 17 11:22:23 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "Do it or else..."?
Fri, 16 Jun 1995, ghItlh charghwI':
> According to Alan Anderson:
> ..
> > Soqra'tIS: > <<bIlo'be'chug vaj bIHegh>> DaH vItu'pu'.
> > > nuq bIQub.
> ..
> > Using {vaj} after {-chugh} seems unnecessary. It's probably just personal
> > preference, but I tend to translate {vaj} more as "thus" than as "then".
>
> It's definitely personal preference. There is canon for using
> {vaj} here, given {bIje'be'chugh vaj bIHegh} as "Buy or die" on
> one of the audiotapes. While there is probably some canon
> somewhere for omitting {vaj}, I cannot specifically recall any.
There is indeed canon which indicates {vaj} is optional:
bIjatlhHa'chugh qaHoH. (TKD p62)
In fact, the subordinate clause can come after the main verb:
qaHoH bIjatlhHa'chugh.
I think {vaj}, like any adverbial, is optional and serves to clarify the
manner or time in which the action takes place.
To me, {vaj} emphasizes a consequent link between the two actions.
If I say {bIjatlhHa'chugh vaj qaHoH} (If you misspeak, then I will kill
you.) the use of {vaj} serves to highlight that {qaHoH} is a direct
result or an inevitable consequence of {bIjatlhHa'chugh}. In other
words, {vaj} is indicating the outcome of {bIjalthHa'chugh}. I think
{vaj} can also be translated as "as a direct result", "subsequently"
"consequently" or "accordingly".
> > -- ghunchu'wI'
> charghwI'
yoDtargh