tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Mar 18 12:31:51 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Finally got some time... KLBC

Shane MiQogh ([email protected]) 

It would make more sence than saying "my mother scares me" because then, through that way, one wouldn't be accusing the mother of doing it on purpose, rather than she is just scary to me in general.
Elizabeth Lawrence <[email protected]> wrote:
  I have never seen any canon that attached -vIp to a pronoun but that is an 
interesting thought, since there is definitely prescedent for putting verb 
suffixes on pronouns, but since that is only done when using the pronoun as 
a form of 'to be' and -vIp is usually interpereted as I am afraid to- I 
think that jIHvIp might be translated as "I am afraid to be" rather than "I 
am afraid" That might be an interesting way of expressing what you want to 
say, though. I don't think I'm qualified to say whether this theory is way 
off base, but if we assume for the sake of argument that jIHvIp is a 
gramatical exprssion of general fear, then you could say, for example "I am 
afraid of my mother" with SoSwI'mo' jIHvIp.

Elizabeth




>From: Shane MiQogh 
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: Finally got some time... KLBC
>Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 10:55:50 -0800 (PST)
>
>so theoretically... if i want to say "I am afraid" as a general satement of 
>it's own without even implying that you are afraid of an object, you could 
>say jIHvIp. If that were the case, then also theoretically, one would say 
>that pronouns are verbs that cannot take prefix but have an implied prefix 
>already.
>Terrence Donnelly wrote: --- Shane 
>MiQogh wrote:
>
> > How would one go about saying "I am afraid of him"
> > as a general statement? I know you have afraid as a
> > verb suffix, but not as a verb. So how would one say
> > they're afraid of some one?
> >
>
>There isn't a simple verb for "be afraid" as far
>as we know. As you say, {-vIp} is a verb suffix.
>One thing you can do is use it with a verb that
>says why you are afraid, eg. {vISuvvIp} 'I am
>afraid to fight him'. Or you can turn the
>idea around and use {ghIj} 'to scare': {mughIj}
>'He scares me.'
>
> > And let's say some one calls you an idiot, how
> > would you go about saying "I'm not an idiot" when
> > there is no form of "be"?
> >
>
>The pronouns stand in as copulas for the idea of
>"to be". I don't remember if there is an example
>in the book, but you can use verbal
>suffixes on the pronouns when they act as copulas.
>So, if someone says {qoH SoH} 'you are a fool',
>you can reply {qoH jIHbe'bej} 'I am definitely not
>a fool'.
>
> > Oh yea, and similar to the one above... How does
> > one say "i am alseep"? Would it be "jIQong" which
> > means "i sleep" literally or would it "vul jIH" or
> > "jIvul"? (Note the usage of the pronoun form, since
> > i want to say "I am asleep", wouldn't i use a
> > pronoune and no prefix so a "be" would be imagined
> > between jIH and "vul"? or since "to be" is infront
> > of the verb inthe dictionary i can have jI- infront
> > of it, or even if it dosn't have "to be" infront in
> > the dictionary can i do it that way and say "jIQong"
> > even though Qong is just "sleep" not "to be asleep"?
> >
>
>As far as we know {Qong} means 'to sleep',
>and can be used to mean 'to be asleep' (for falling
>asleep, I'd use {jIQongchoH} 'I begin to sleep').
>{jIvul} means "I am unconscious", which
>is a completely different idea. The basic point is
>that English makes a distinction between general
>activities (such as "I sleep every night") and
>on-going states (such as "I am asleep"), but that
>Klingon does not, so {jIQong} means both 'I sleep'
>and 'I am asleep'. If you really have to emphasize
>the on-going nature of the act, you can say
>{jIQongtaH} which means "I am still sleeping/asleep."
>
>Your question about {vul jIH}: this is ungrammatical
>as written. You at least need to add a verbal
>prefix to the verb: {jIvul} "I am unconscious."
>You could add the pronoun for emphasis, {jIvul jIH}
>"_I_ am (the one who's) unconscious", but you
>definitely need the verb prefix. (Ah, I see now
>what you're getting at with the stand-alone pronoun.
>But you can only use that construction with a
>noun and pronoun-as-copula. {vul} is a verb.
>You could say {vulwI' jIH} "I am an unconscious-type
>of person", but that would be a very wordy way to
>say it, and would further imply that you are by
>nature always a {vulwI'}.)
>
>Your problem is trying to account for the verb
>"be" required by the English. You can't go by
>English usage to decide Klingon grammar. English
>adjectives are all of the form "to be X". This
>describes a state. Most English adjectives have
>action verb equivalents that mean "to X", formed
>in various ways (eg. "to be asleep/to sleep", "to be
>red/to redden", "to be happy/to rejoice", etc.)
>Klingon verbs already cover both the "to be X" and "to
>X" ideas, so the presence or absence of "be" in the
>English is not relevant. You just need to handle the
>Klingon verb on its own terms and add the
>appropriate verb prefix to it.
>
>-- ter'eS BG
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/





		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Travel
 Find  great deals to the top 10 hottest destinations!

Back to archive top level