tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 14 17:50:08 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: weQqul's Urdu poem

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

I'm not going to try to pick through this and stick things in various
places.  I'll just say it up here!

First: I occasionally think of a phrase that comes out as <noun>
<pronoun>'e', and I back off.  I don't think it works.  I have no proof, but
it is my feeling that pronouns will act verblike or nounlike at different
times, and when in a "to be" construction, it is verblike.

Second:

    ben chalvaD bI'Ip.
    Years ago you made an oath to the sky.

    ben chalvaD bI'Ip SoH.
    Years ago you made an oath to the sky.

    ben chalvaD bI'Ip SoH'e'.
    Years ago *you* made an oath to the sky.

    ben chalvaD bI'Ip *SoH*.
    Years ago *you* made an oath to the sky.

    ben chalvaD bI'Ip *SoH'e'*.
    Years ago *YOU!* made an oath to the sky.


English does not contain an inflected topicalization or emphasis (unless you
count shouting as a kind of inflection); Klingon does.  Both languages
(presumably) allow you to emphasize with your voice (if Klingon does not,
I'll be surprised).  If you say the second line above completely deadpan, in
my opinion the /SoH/ is not going to be emphasized.  Both the first and
second sentences are normal sentences.  The first is simply of the more
common sort.  When Okrand discusses "emphasis" on TKD p. 60, his translation
does not suggest any emphasis at all (but when he's talking about emphasis
at other times, he makes the emphasis in the translation very obvious).

If you use lots of unneeded pronouns in your sentences, a Klingon would
probably stop you and ask you why you were talking like that, but unless you
make a big deal about the pronouns, saying them slowly or louder than the
other words, I don't think he'd see it as emphasis, just redundancy.

SuStel
Stardate 4038.3



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Boozer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: weQqul's Urdu poem


> Voragh suggested:
> > >    ben chalvaD bI'Ip SoH.
> > >    DaH jIghoS.  'IplIj jIH.
> > >
> > >    Years ago *you* made an oath to the sky.
> > >    Now I come.  *I* am your oath.
>
> SuStel:
> >I'd like to point out to weQqul that saying the pronoun is not
necessarily
> >the same as emphasis.  I know Voragh disagrees with me on this.
>
> Not always. <g>
>
> >For emphasis, you should use the /-'e'/ suffix.  Just using an explicit
> >pronoun can be used for clarity, or, in my opinion, to fill out
syllables.
> >Consider:
> >
> >   Duj tIj tlhIngan.  vImuS.
> >   The Klingon boarded the ship.  I hate him(?)/it(?).
> >
> >Which do I hate?  The Klingon or the ship?  I can clarify:
> >
> >   Duj tIj tlhIngan.  ghaH vImuS.
> >   The Klingon boarded the ship.  I hate him.
> >
> >This is not emphasis, it is clarification.
>
> Agreed... unless you've already been talking about that particular Klingon
> and the ship is just a side issue.
>
> >If I use /-'e'/, it would be emphasis.
> >
> >   Duj tIj tlhIngan.  ghaH'e' vImuS.
> >   The Klingon boarded the ship.  I hate *him*.
> >   The Klingon boarded the ship.  It is he whom I hate.
> >
> >(Presumably I'm saying I hate the Klingon and not the ship, though
context
> >could change this interpretation.)
>
> No arguments here.  Depending on the context, you may well need to make it
> this explicit, though I'd bet it sounds a bit stilted, rather like your
"It
> is he whom I hate".  (We'd need to ask Maltz about the use and over-use of
> {'e'} in Klingon style.)
>
> To re-analyze my off-the-cuff translation:
>
>     ben chalvaD bI'Ip SoH.
>     Years ago *you* made an oath to the sky.
>
> Here the pronoun is emphatic.  It adds no additional syntactic information
> than the prefix {bI-}.
>
>     DaH jIghoS.  'IplIj jIH.
>     Now I come.  I am your oath.
>
> Here it's a case of pronoun-as-verb.  A simple "I am X" statement.  In
> fact, without the pronoun, there's no sentence.  Emphasis, however, can be
> added:
>
>     DaH jIghoS.  'IplIj jIH'e'.
>     Now I come.  *I* am your oath.
>
> Here tagging the pronoun with {-'e'} is emphatic, though it could also be
a
> way of shifting the topic from you (in the previous line) to me (the rest
> of the poem).  Using this version, however, destroys the rudimentary rhyme
> and adds an unneeded syllable unless we add {-'e'} to the first line as
well:
>
>     ben chalvaD bI'Ip SoH'e'.
>     DaH jIghoS.  'IplIj jIH'e'.
>
>     Years ago *YOU* made an oath to the sky.
>     Now I come.  *I* am your oath.
>
> But this is probably way too much emphasis for such short lines.  (But
> reading it aloud, I think it scans better with the {-'e'}s!)
>
>
>
> -- 
> Voragh
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>
>

Back to archive top level