tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 08 04:49:30 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: joj usage...

QeS lagh ([email protected]) 

ghItlhpu' Senara:

>[SuvwI' targh je jojDaq jIba'] 'e' vImaS, 'ach lugh'a' mu'tlheghvam?

This is a very interesting discussion going on here. To be honest, before 
now I don't think I would have questioned using something like {Qang 
be'nalDaj je puq} "the child of the Chancellor and his wife", and I think I 
have used the construct before.

I would argue for the following chain of logic:
- we can replace nouns in normal sentences with pronouns: {ghobchuq qeylIS 
morav je} "Kahless and Morath fight each other" becomes {ghobchuq chaH}.
- we can use pronouns in noun-noun constructions with locative nouns: {jIH 
bIngDaq} "below me", {chaH jojDaq} "between them".
- so we should probably be able to replace pronouns in noun-noun 
constructions with multiple nouns. It just seems unnecessarily restrictive 
to only permit sets of one thing in the construct. I don't understand why 
{SuvwI'pu' jojDaq jIghoS} might be permitted but {SuvwI' Qang je jojDaq 
jIghoS} would not.

That being said, the opposite argument could be taken: that locative nouns 
can't take possessive suffixes, so they can't be possessed in the same 
fashion as normal nouns can. Also, there are some problems if you try to put 
a {je}-linked chain as the non-first noun of a noun-noun construction. There 
are three possible readings of {Qang nawlogh SuvwI'pu' je}:

1: the chancellor and the squadron's soldiers
2: the chancellor's squadron and the soldiers
3: the chancellor, the squadron and the soldiers

This might speak against the use of {je}-chains in noun-noun constructions 
in general, or it might just be a usage that's avoided because of this 
ambiguity.

So in short, this might well be a question to address to Okrand at {qep'a'}, 
seeing as it involves the usage of some fairly basic grammar. AFAIK, we 
don't have a definitive answer. The possibility from BoP shown by Voragh and 
SuStel might have something to show, but even that appears to be pretty 
shallow in terms of an answer.

So in typical Klingon fashion, here's the short answer: {maSovchu'be'}. {{:D

Savan.

QeS lagh

_________________________________________________________________
What's your house worth? Click here to find out:  
http://www.ninemsn.realestate.com.au

Back to archive top level