tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 15 17:44:34 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: "to be"
jIja'pu':
>2) The Klingon Dictionary section 6.3 explains that there is no verb
> meaning "to be" in the Klingon language.
>
>3) TKD 6.3 goes on to explain how pronouns can be used in the sense of
> "to be" in a couple of limited contexts. One of these is the sort
> of "I am a fool" idea that prompted Albert Arendsen's question.
ja' Chakotay:
>well, thanks... didn't help me anything further tho ;-)
I intentionally didn't give a complete answer, because it was apparent
that you hadn't carefully read the section I referred to. *You* have
to do some work in order to learn, too. :-)
>actually I like Klingon very much because it is so limited and the trick is
>to find alternatives...
Klingon's "limitations" are mostly in the area of vocabulary. I have yet to
encounter an idea that can't be expressed using Klingon grammar -- with the
notable exception of "I think, therefore I am." :-)
>but I have not found an alternative yet for some of
>the more complex sentences where the verb "to be" plays a central role...
The standard "alternative" to a complex sentence is, of course, a series
of simple sentences. If you'll provide an example of one of your "to be"
sentences, I'll give you my suggestions for how the "to be"-ness can be
toned down and how the idea underlying the sentence can be brought out.
-- ghunchu'wI'