tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 19 14:20:09 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: -be' with -qu'

Steven Boozer ([email protected])

• From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: -be' with -qu'
• Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2004 14:26:54 -0600
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]>

>>MorphemeAddict:
>>> > and in general how are the meanings of the verb suffixes changed by the
>>> > differing positions of the rovers?  tkd doesn't address this very
>>> > thoroughly.
>
>Voragh:
>>pIHoHvIpbe'qu'
>>We are NOT afraid to kill you
>>
>>pIHoHvIpqu'be'
>>We are not AFRAID to kill you.
>>
>>pIHoHqu'vIpbe'
>>We are not afraid to KILL you
>>
>>Note the last three examples with {-qu'} and {-be'}.

taD:
>These last 3 examples are in the rover section, on page 49.
>The examples are actually capitalized differently (I changed the 
>capitalization to Voragh's above quote to show where), depending on the 
>position of {-qu'}, to show what's being emphasized. This shows how {-qu'} 
>(and presumably {-be'}) emphasizes the suffix/verb right before.

Oops; the formatting was lost during the copy-and-paste!

Here are those examples again, along with some explanation by Okrand in 
(TKD 46f):

   The roving nature of {-be'} is best illustrated in the following set
   of words:
     choHoHvIp     "you are afraid to kill me"
     choHoHvIpbe'  "you are not afraid to kill me"
     choHoHbe'vIp  "you are afraid to not kill me"
   In the second word, the negated notion is "afraid" (that is, "not
   afraid"), and {-be'} follows {-vIp}. In the third word, the negated
   notion is {kill} (that is, "not kill"), so {-be'} follows {HoH}.

and

   The roving nature of {-qu'} can be seen in the following set:
     pIHoHvIpbe'qu'  "we are NOT afraid to kill you"
     pIHoHvIpqu'be'  "we are not AFRAID to kill you"
     pIHoHqu'vIpbe'  "we are not afraid to KILL you"
   The first word might be used after an enemy challenged the bravery
   of the speaker. The second might be followed by an explanation such
   as, "We are not willing to kill you because we require your services."
   The third word would be used to emphasize killing, as opposed to some
   other form of punishment...



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons 

• References:
  • Re: -be' with -qu'
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
  • Re: -be' with -qu'
    • From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>
  • KLBC: -be' with -qu'
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: -be' with -qu'
    • From: Tad Stauffer <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: -be' with -qu'
• Next by Date: Re: variations from s15
• Prev by thread: Re: -be' with -qu'
• Next by thread: Klingon WOTD: rom (n)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level