tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 27 13:17:33 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: The specifics of indefinites

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

QeS lagh wrote:
>However, what happens when the verb in question is <neH>, which doesn't use
><'e'> at all?  As I see it, there are two choices:
>
>  ??qechvam'e' ja'lu' neHlu'chugh   OR
>  ??qechvam'e' ja'lu' net neHchugh
>  "if someone wants to report this idea"

Voragh:
> >You're making this far too complicated.  You don't need all these {-lu'}s
> >or even {net}.  {-lu'} "is used to indicate that the subject is unknown,
> >indefinite, and/or general" (TKD p.38) and many of Okrand's examples there
> >use "someone/something".  The someone you want may be unknown, but s/he is
> >not "indefinite, and/or general"; you have a specific, if unknown, someone
> >in mind.  For that, use the noun {vay'} "someone, anyone":

QeS lagh:
>So the distinction between <vay'> and <-lu'> is that <vay'> is more often
>referential (i.e. it picks out a target, even if I don't know what that
>target is), and <-lu'> more often non-referential?
>
>But that still leaves my question unanswered - can <neH> use <net>, or do we
>have to resort to <vay'> or something else?

{net} was an unintentional addition to the language created during the 
filming of Star Trek III.  Valkris says to Kruge about the Genesis data she 
has acquired:

   Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej.
   "You will find it useful." (subtitle)

Will Martin (charghwI') explained what happened:

   ... this line was one of those Valkris was filmed saying in English,
   then redubbed in Klingon. Okrand had to match lip movements. The
   subtitle was something like "You'll find it useful." There was no
   mention of "for the mission" in the subtitle, but Okrand needed to
   add something to give her a reason to keep her lips moving. Note
   that lip movements for "You'll find" look a lot like {Qu'vaD}, "it"
   looks a lot like {lI'} and "useful" loosely matches {tu'bej}.

Now that the word was in ST3, he later had to explain it in TKD where he 
presented two examples (see p. 65f.):

   qama'pu' DIHoH net Sov
   One knows we kill prisoners... TKD

   Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej
   One certainly finds it useful for the mission. TKD

and said

   {net} is used only under special circumstances, but {'e'} is common...

Special indeed.  Okrand has never used {net} again in all these 
years.  I've often wondered why he's avoided it since he's used other 
"accidental" features of the language.

>However, what happens when the verb in question is <neH>, which doesn't use
><'e'> at all?  As I see it, there are two choices:
>
>  ??qechvam'e' ja'lu' neHlu'chugh   OR
>  ??qechvam'e' ja'lu' net neHchugh
>  "if someone wants to report this idea"

WRT to using {net} with {neH} in sentence-as-object formulae, see TKD p.66f.:

   When the verb of the second sentence is {neH} "want", neither {'e'}
   nor {net} is used, but the construction is otherwise identical to
   that just described.
     {jIQong vIneH}   "I want to sleep."
     {qalegh vIneH}   "I want to see you."
     {Dalegh vIneH}   "I want you to see him."

This rules out your second choice.  {pItlh}.  Just say:

   qechvam ja' neHchugh vay'

> >Whenever you translate "someone", don't automatically think {-lu'} or
> >{net}.  Consider using {vay'}.
>
>It's just that I have seen <'e' Sovlu'> or the like crop up so many times in
>my personal writing.  Errors of grammar like these are part of my Klingon,
>and I am doing my best to eradicate them one by annoying little one. :)

We have only one example of {Sovlu'}:

   De' lI' Sovlu'DI' chaq Do'Ha'.
   Knowledge of useful information may be unfortunate. PK

Note that it is not used with {net} or {'e'}.  That usage arose long ago on 
this mailing list and was passed on from one poster to another.  Many of us 
think that it is unnecessary.  Here's good advise from long-time Klingonist 
Seqram (Mark Shoulson):

   as soon as you catch yourself saying ... {'e' Xlu'}, immediately start
   to think seriously about substituting {net X}.


>                                     Do we have any canon support one
>way or the other (for instance, the usage of <vay'> as you describe)?

Although AFAIK Okrand has never actually explained the finer points, I gave 
you all the examples I know of where {vay'} = "someone, anyone", some of 
which are used (I think) in just this sense.  Why don't you look at them again?





-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level