tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 24 07:27:16 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: I-us prefix
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: I-us prefix
- Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 14:20:42 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Holtej" at Apr 22, 98 06:57:42 am
According to Holtej:
>
>
> Harlekinvo':
>
> > I think you got the problem - there is no prefix noted in TKD for I-us,
> > and there is no Type 1 verb suffix workaround either.
>
> jIQoch. The reason there's no I-us (or I-me, you-you (sg/pl), we-me, we-us)
> is precisely because of the VS1 /-egh/, /-chuq/. Sure, it doesn't convey
> singular/plural, but for some reason that doesn't bother me.
>
> "I can see us (on the security monitor)"
> jIHDaq malegh'eghlaH.
This works for me, or:
jIHDaq jIH tlhIH je SaleghlaH.
Who are you talking to? The whole issue of person has some
slippery edges.
If we can all see ourselves in the monitor, Holtej's suggestion
is better than yours. If I am the only one who can see "us" on
the monitor, then, am I talking to myself? No. Am I talking to
a first person plural? No. I'm talking to a SECOND person
plural. I am set apart from these people because the singular
first person is the one doing the seeing, so the singular first
person is addressing someone who is not the singular first
person. I suggest that the addressees are (like most
addressees) second person.
The first person plural only works when there is nothing
setting the first person singular apart from the other members
of the first person, like {tlhIngan maH} and {DaH maSop.} I
don't buy the idea that "I see us" needs to be considered a
valid statement. I see it as "I see you and me" and Klingon
never addresses the issue of mixed persons with a conjunction.
I go for "I-see-you and me," = {jIH tlhIH je Salegh.}
> To summon charghwI''s mantra, recast, recast!
You betcha.
> > Harlekin
>
> --Holtej
charghwI'