tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 07 12:27:06 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: joj usage...

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

qurgh wrote:

>I was reading through the entire dictionary part (Qov qatlho') and came across
>joj. Are the following correct:

We have only one example of {joj}:

   poSDaq nIHDaq je QamtaHvIS SuvwI'pu', chaH jojDaq yItnIS lopwI'
   The initiate must pass through a gauntlet of warriors. S9

Literally: "While warriors are standing on the left side and on the right 
side, the initiate must walk between them."  Note the repetition of the 
suffix {-Daq} on both the area nouns {poS} and {nIS}.

>  cha' SuvwI' jojDaq jIba'.
>  I sit between the two warriors.

This seems fine.

>  SuvwI' targh je jojDaq jIba'.
>  I sit between the warrior and the targh.

I hesitated on this, but in view of this example:

   quwargh tach Qe' je qoDDaq Hov leng Soj DatIv
   Enjoy Star Trek themed food and drink at Quark's Bar and Restaurant. STX

this seems fine too.

Note {tach Qe' je} is the second or "possessed" noun phrase of a noun+noun 
construction, which itself forms part of a larger noun-phrase+noun 
construction with the noun {qoD} "inside, interior":  "at Quark's 
bar-and-restaurant's inside".

>I guess the bigger question in my mind now is: Can a list of nouns linked by a
>conjunction still act as a the first noun in a noun-noun constuction?

AFAIK, there are no known examples of the case you have in mind.  (Can 
anyone else think of one?)

However, I was able to find this example:

   'o' chuyDaH Hongghor je
   aft thrusters and impulse drive  (BOP)

which is another case where the list acts as the second element in a 
noun+noun construction:  i.e. "the aft's thruster(s)-and-impulse-drive".

   naQ megh'an 'er'In je tI'uch.
   naQ 'er'In megh'an je tI'uch.
   Grasp both ends of the stick
   ("grasp the end and the other end of the stick") (HQ 12.2)

Yet another case where the list is the second element in a noun+noun 
construction (i.e. "the sticks's end-and-(other)-end"), with the whole 
construction acting as the object of the verb {tI'uch}.

   lenglIj lutebjaj lengwIjvaD bel rap, Sov [rap, ngoQ rap je] Danobpu'bogh
   May your journey be filled with the same joy, wisdom, and purpose you have
   given mine. (Frasier)

Here a longer list of nouns plus qualities - {bel rap, Sov rap, ngoQ rap 
je} - is the object of the relative clause.

>Can I say?
>
>  SuvwI' targh je Soj vIghaj
>  I have the targh's and the warrior's food
>
>  HoD beqmey chIjwI' DeghwI' je Soj vIghaj
>  I have the Captain's, the Crew's, the navigator's and the helmmen's food.
>
>or do I have to say?
>
>  SuvwI' Soj targh Soj je vIghaj
>  I have the warrior's food and the targh's food.
>
>  HoD Soj, beqmey Soj, chIjwI' Soj, DeghwI' Soj je vIghaj.
>  I have the Captain's food, the Crew's food, the navigators food and the
>  Helmmen's food
>
>Or can I say either?

I simply don't know.  If a list can act as the second element of a 
noun+noun construction, it's logical to assume that it can act as the first 
element as well.  Unfortunately, "natural" languages aren't necessarily 
logical.

As a practical matter of style, if the list is too long it may be best to 
repeat {Soj}, as you did in your second example.  Long lists like these 
work in English because the genitive ending /'s/ is on each noun, allowing 
us to keep track of who possesses what.  Repeating the noun feels awkward 
to us, but probably not to Klingon-speakers, who tolerate a higher degree 
of repetition.  (A linguistic echo of the {bIraqlul}, the well-known 
redundancy in Klingon body parts, perhaps? <g>)



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level