tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 13 23:50:52 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: SuvwI'bom
ja' Qov:
>Now I'd say {nuq 'oH Dujvetlh'e'} and 'Iv ghaH nIHwI''e'}. So we are
>backwards.
I hesitate to invoke a nonstandard dialect to help; it might backfire.
But the Morskan border guard in ST6 asked {Dujvets 'o nuq?} Focus on
the word order, not the pronunciation, and it matches my example.
>> If I've asked about your name, I consider your name to be the topic of
>> my question. I do *not* consider the word "your name" as that topic.
>> {ponglIj 'oH nuq'e'?}
>
>Ah, quite the opposite to me. You've asked about "my name" you
>haven't asked about Qov.
If I haven't asked about Qov, why would Qov be the answer?
>'Iv ghaH loDvetlh'e'? (the man is the topic)
>
>chaq SuvwI' ghaH.
>teHbe', *meter reader* ghaH loDvetlh'e'.
>bImuj, vavchaj ghaH.
>
>An entire conversation could ensue, with the man as the topic of each
>sentence. I'm not going to change your mind on this, but I'm
>understanding mine better and I'm more sure of myself now.
This example fits in my mind fine the way you've done it. You're not
asking for the identity of the man, you are asking about his function
or occupation or something else that describes him.
>I see the topicalized noun as saying, "Consider the noun, it is an X"
>or "Given the noun, what/who is it?"
But you've changed the word order between these two, and I don't know
why you've done so. I see it as "Given the noun, it is what?"
>What does Okrand say? "As for the noun, they are X."
Exactly in the order I interpret it.
>I'll understand your sentences, but I'll consider them backwards.
As will I yours. I likely have more practice than you do at considering
interrogative "to be" sentences backwards, though, since I seem to be in
the minority in my interpretation of how they work.
Interestingly, it seems that the sentences that I interpret differently
are the ones asking about names. I generally tend to agree with the other
examples people have given. So maybe it's not the "to be"-ness that we
disagree about; maybe it's what we consider a name to be.
>lu'. maQoch neH. qayajtaH.
mayajchuq 'e' vIcherghqangchu'. :-)