tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 25 12:46:30 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhIngan Hol chu' jIH
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: tlhIngan Hol chu' jIH
- Date: Sun, 25 Aug 1996 15:45:59 -0400
qaSDI' 96-08-25 00:47:56 EDT, jatlh charghwI':
[jIjatlhta']
> > In Power Klingon, we hear {'avwI'vaD jatlh qama' jIghung}. Now, if we to
> > suppose a colloquialism in use here, then I imagine I could say ~{'avwI
> jatlh
> > qama' jIghung}. But I just see this as either "The prisoner speaks
guard '
> I
> > am hungry'" or "The prisoner says guard 'I am hungry.'" Neither one
makes
> > much sense to me, although I would be able to figure it out.
> I'm going to give up on writing for HolQeD. I simply work better
> in the mailing list environment. You have just made a very good
> point, and torpedoed an article I had submitted, all in one fell
> swoop.
choquvqu'moHneS charghwI'! ghItlhlIj vIQaw'pu'mo' jItlhIj.
> So, when {jatlh} is used as "say", it can take no object? That
> would resolve my conflict over using the quotation as the
> object. I definitely see direct quotation as the glomming
> together of two otherwise grammatically independent sentences.
Yes, this is what I mean. Even in the English, the word "say" is used a
little differently than one might expect (although I don't have a good
reference on me to prove this; the dictionary doesn't say a word about it and
it's just my opinion). After all, one might hear,
David says, "The Klingon language is obscure regarding verbs of speech."
Is the quoted speech the object of say? If so, why must we put a comma
there? We can also reverse the order, just like the Klingon, resulting in:
"The Klingon language is obscure regarding verbs of speech," says David.
Now, I'm not saying Klingon must work like this because English does. I'm
just pointing out that "say" may not be such a simple word as it seems.
> > {Dotlhmaj vIja'} "I report our status." For this gloss, {ja'} seems to
> take
> > an object: that which is being reported. Perhaps you can stick quoted
> > material on this as well. I don't know.
>
> Are you saying this is an Okrandian example? All the canon
> examples of {ja'} I've seen use an object with {ja'}, and that
> object is the person addressed. Is this one I've missed?
>
> Still, if you are making it up, it makes sense, since the object
> is not a direct quotation...
No, I made this up to give an example of possibilities for {ja'}. I *can't*
give canon examples, because there are so *few*! At the qep'a', I asked that
*examples* of speech be put on the wish list. I don't mind figuring it out
myself, but there has to be material available!
> > {ghorgh mamej nutlhob} or {nutlhob ghorgh mamej} "They ask us 'When do
we
> > leave?'", NOT ~{ghorgh mamej lutlhob}. I *might* believe {maHvaD ghorgh
> > mamej lutlhob}, but you'd have to bring out a very convincing argument.
>
> jIQochbe'chu'! I really won't like it if the direct quotation
> winds up being the object of the verb of speech. While we've
> been doing this for a long time, upon reviewing TKD recently, I
> came to realize that this may be the most common error we've
> been making in the Klingon speaking community..
>
> I completely agree with you.
choquvqa'moHneS!
It's nice to know I haven't been annoying everybody with this!
SuStel
Stardate 96652.1