tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 28 09:20:08 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
yIwIv
- From: Anthony Curran <[email protected]>
- Subject: yIwIv
- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 11:17:55 -0500
Mark E. Shoulson writes on Wed 28 Jun,1995 10:06
>Responding to charghwI''s request for input regarding his use of
>yIwIv for
>"which"...
>I think part of why there hasn't been too much response is
>because there's not much fault to find with it, grammatically.
>Something like "*nuqDIch" is obviously questionable from a
>grammatical perspective, and while "targh nuq" may be less so,
>it's certainly questionable semantically. yIwIv is obviously
>correct grammatically (make sure you use tIwIv when it's "which
>targhs are to be killed?"), and its meaning is transparent.
>I'm not so sure that it works in all cases, though. I haven;'t
>got too many specific examples in mind, but it may not be
>sufficiently general, or it may also fall prey to being too
>idiomatic. It may sound like I'm asking you to choose something
>when in fact you have no control over it at all, but are merely
>indicating a "choice" that may hev been made for you, perhaps
>confusing you... For example, plans have been intercepted, and
>your captain asks, "choose the planets which the Terrans will
>attack."
>"You mean I get to decide?" I suppose if you view "wIv" as more
>like
>"indicate" (le'moH?) it might be clearer.
You might say "tell me the planets which the Terrans will attack.
<<yIjatlh>> or <<yIja'>> would not have the same connotation of
decision as <<yIwIv>>.
>I also have a gut-feeling that there are simply constructions
>for which yIwIv just falls apart (no examples now, so I may be
>wrong. It's happened before. At least twice.) It also doesn't
>help us with the "which" constructions that are not questioning.
>We've been using questioning pronouns as relatives sometimes, on
>the grounds that it's like two sentences with the second
>answering the first (translating "I saw what you did" as "What
>have you done? I saw that." [nuq Data'pu' 'e' vIlegh] or
>"The what which you have done I saw" [nuq Data'pu'bogh vIlegh]).
>It should be noted that this is NOT cannon usage, but on the
>whole is more reasonable that it might seem at first glance.
>But I don't think yIwIv will help us in "I saw which targhs the
>captain liked."
>This isn't to say that yIwIv is not a good answer to the "which"
>problem.
>But I tend to doubt it's the only one. There's no reason why
>all cases of
>"which" should be handled by even remotely similar constructions
>in
>Klingon, just because they're the same in English. yIwIv is one
>more tool.
I get the feeling from reading this that you think charghwI' that
we use yIwIv exclusively to indicate "which". I thing
charghwI''s advice had more to do with recasting these questions
in the form of a command that with using a particular word. In
the CK tape, Okrand tells us that Klingons are suspicious of too
many questions. From everything I've seen, they are used to
commands. It might be good practice to stop yourself every time
you start to phrase something as a question, and think about
whether it would still work as a command.
I'm still a beginner at this, so my opinion may not be that
valuable. On the other hand, I do have the advantage of more
recent conversion to certain ways of thinking. Like the value of
recasting a sentence rather than trying to make an alien sentence
fit Klingon grammar.
>~mark
qo'ran