tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 28 07:45:46 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Clipped vs not
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC Clipped vs not
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 09:45:45 CST
I said
> > I don't think pronouns are ever "clipped"; they can be left out
> > if they are not functioning as verbs, but that is not clipping.
>
SuStel replied
> Quite correct.
>
> > It doesn't make sense to use imperative with pronouns-as-verbs,
> > so where is the evidence for clipping of pronouns?
>
> Well, clipping doesn't only happen when giving commands. For example (from
> canon, I believe), {So'wI' chu'ta'} "cloaking device engaged."
>
here, I was referring to the clipping of _verbs_ as opposed
to affixes, which TKD only mentions for commands
> > would you accept {Ha'DIbaH targh'e'} as clipped Klingon?
>
> If it were simply {Ha'DIbaH targh}, I might. No, I don't think we've ever
> seen this sort of clipping in canon, but I don't consider it much of a
> stretch.
>
so you're saying that if I clip the verbal pronoun I should clip
the <<subject-marking -'e'>> as well? why's that?
> Okay, I'm not trying to say "clipping *is* this," or "clipping *is* that."
> I'm just trying to come up with some ideas of exactly how to explain it
> without quoting all of the TKD section on it.
>
don't misunderstand me, please! I'm not trying to have you defend
yourself! It just caught my curiosity that you considered clipping
of pronouns and I want to understand.
HomDoq