tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 21 13:23:03 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Klingon Poetry for College (2nd attempt)

> > tIghmaj puqpu' DIghojnISmoH

jatlh charghwI':
> puqpu'vaD tIghmaj DIghojnISmoH. A lot of people don't like
> this construction, but the simple truth is, this is the
> only way Okrand has ever shown us to handle putting {-moH}
> on a verb that already has a direct object. Your method
> throws two nouns in the direct object position with no
> explanation as to which one is the direct object and what
> is the other one doing in the sentence?
>
> You do use the {XvaD Y ZmoH} construction later in your
> poem.


I'm one of those who don't like it, and for a change I'm in agreement with
Krankor.  I really liked his "From the Grammarian's Desk" column in HolQeD
Vol.8 No.2 where he spends a great deal of discussion considering this
problem.

I was stunned by the wonderfully obvious revelation he produces on pages
6-7.  He quotes THE KLINGON DICTIONARY, page 60: "Any noun in the sentence
indicating something other than subject or object comes first, before the
object noun.  Such nouns usually end in a Type 5 noun suffix."  He points
out that it says "usually," and not "always," and therefore any "extra"
nouns in a sentence probably get stuck in the front.  Thus,

tIghmaj puqpu' DIghojnISmoH
We need to teach children our customs.

{puqpu'} "children" is certain the object of {ghojmoH} "cause to learn."
Thus, {puqpu' DIghojnISmoH} "We need to teach children."  {tIghmaj} is a
noun which doesn't indicate subject or object, and thus by the sentence
quoted above, it should go in front of the sentence.

I'm not saying I think this is NECESSARILY the right interpretation, but I
like it a whole lot more than {puqpu'vaD tIghmaj DIghojnISmoH}.  And as
Krankor points out, either version has potential to be ambiguous.

(And I was also pleased to see him suggest my favorite interpretation: that
the {ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH} sentence could have been a special case.)


SuStel
Stardate 99890.2

Back to archive top level