tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 24 22:24:23 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Nature phenomenon
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Nature phenomenon
- Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 22:23:24 -0800
At 22:16 98-01-22 -0800, peHruS wrote:
}In a message dated 98-01-22 13:02:33 EST, SuStel writes, due to a conversation
}between Qov and peHruS:
}
}<< Qov's
} suggestion that {SIS} and {peD} and so forth use the indefinite subject
} suffix {-lu'} advocates this idea. >>
}
}-------peHruS here-------------
}teHlu' It's true!
}Doqlu' It's red???
What? What is red or true? Unless these are idioms I am unfamiliar with,
you are stating that SOMETHING is red or true. These exclamations are not
comparable to it's raining, and the fact that they don't work without some
contrived context is not an argument against {SISlu'}. Could you write some
context in which you propose you could use these? The reason I transform
the "it" in it's raining to an indefinite subject is that there ISN'T a
subject. There is definitely a thing you can point to that is red, if
something is red.
}I feel SIS and peD do not require subjects at all. Even the English "it" may
}not be a subject, really, even though in a grammar tree, "it" is considered
}the subject. What does "it" refer to? Nothing! "It" is not the pronoun "it"
}which refers to a previous topic.
This is exactly the logic that mde me decide that {-lu'} as correct here.
If something has no definite subject at all, then the subject is indefinite.
And that is expressed in Klingon with {-lu'}
}English is so weird we cannot say
}"Raining"; we have to add "It is....." just to feel right.
That's because that is the idiom we use to express that concept.
}Aha, back to feelings. I prefer SIS and peD without -lu'.
So did I, at one point. But I changed my mind. And not based on feelings.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian