tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 01 17:08:03 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nested <<'e'>>s
- From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: nested <<'e'>>s
- Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 15:01:00 -0600
Voragh:
> >AFAIK, Okrand has never nested {'e'}, but he has used two in one sentence:
> > bISuv 'e' yIwIv; bISutlh 'e' yIwIvQo'
> > Choose to fight, not negotiate. TKW
SuStel:
>If you've got two related but independent bits separated by a semi-colon,
>and there's no colon in the line, chances are what you really have is two
>sentences. That is the case in this and numerous other Klingon utterances:
>a semi-colon is used because you've got two complete sentences that are so
>closely related that they deserve to be together. They're still really two
>sentences though. This proverb is equivalent to
> bISuv 'e' yIwIv. bISutlh 'e' yIwIvQo'.
>The reason he uses a semi-colon is to link the two sentences more closely.
>Ignoring the fact that each non-/'e'/ word is a complete sentence in itself,
>you've got two sentences here.
quSDaq bIba'.
>Anyway, this has nothing to do with "nested /'e'/," and is all about how you
>look at it.
Or how you punctuate it.
Granted the TKW example neither proves or disproves that "nested" SAO's are
permitted, but my point was that using two very closely together in what
is, formally, one compound sentence shows that the Klingon listener/reader
is expected to be able to keep them straight.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons