tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 08 15:53:18 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: other person imperatives

sangqar ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

> > > It appears that I stand corrected...
> > > Thanks to everyone who responded. I had no idea that this construction
> > > ("Let's go!") was, in fact, a "non-second-person imperative". I always
> > > thought of it more as a {-jaj}-type of idea.
> >
> > And indeed it is a {-jaj}-type idea:
> >
> > This suffix is used to express a desire or wish on the part of the speaker that something take
> > place in the future. (TKD 176 [Addendum 4.2.9])
> >
> > And that's exactly what the third-person imperative is: a desire on the
> > part of the speaker that something happen...
> 
> Just thought I'd throw in here...  The English "let's" is a contraction
> for "Let us".  So "Let's go!" is really "Let us go!" and it is actually
> imperative, but the object of the verb "let" is inferred by context.
 
Actually, I was referring to the concept of the third-person imperative as it exists in Finnish 
(and apparently also in Greek, and Hebrew, and Latin) (as opposed to circumlocutions to get 
around the lack of one in English).  Although I haven't studied any of those last three at more 
than a cursory level, a quick search showed me:

The third person imperative is quite different. It is a statement that something should exist, or 
an action should be taken....The only other place where third person imperatives were 
commonly used was in the statements of laws and other legal writing.
   -(http://www.du.edu/~etuttle/classics/nugreek/lesson13.htm)

This example is specifically about Greek.  Some other pages I found suggested that the 
element of the command being fulfilled in the future is stronger in Latin. (On the other hand 
though, technically all commands are meant to be fulfilled at least some distance in the 
future; if the desire were being fulfilled in the present, threre'd be no need to isuue the 
command.)

Now, not having read very many laws or contracts in Finnish, I can't comment on whether the 
third-person imperative is used that way in Finnish, but it certainly is used in the sense that 
something should exist, or an action should be taken.

In Finnish, the third-person imperative is quite rare in everyday speech, outside of a few 
idomatic phrases, such as "Onneksi olkoon", "Congratulations", which really means 
something more like, "May it (turn out to) be for happiness/luck."

Anyway, as I said before, the third-person imperative in Finnish is associated quite strongly 
quite strongly in my mind with {-jaj}.  While I wouldn't necessarily translate any {-jaj} phrase 
into thrid-person imperative, I would definitely translate any third-person imperative (in a 
Finnish source text) as a {-jaj} phrase.

> ...Paul

-Sangqar

Back to archive top level