tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 31 14:24:19 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC (adverbials)
ter'eS wrote:
> loQ Doqqu'bogh Doch vIparHa'
>
>I hesitate to declare this a rule, but it appears that adverbs affect the
>first verb they come to. It's
>hard to slip another adverb in for the second verb when you're using {-bogh}
Here we have a difference of opinion. Although Okrand calls {-bogh} "the
relative clause marker", to me this Klingon sentence has only one real
clause, although it has two in the English translation. {Doqqu'bogh Doch}
doesn't feel like a true dependent clause because you can't rearrange them,
as you can with almost every other type of dependent clause, putting the
adverbial between. IOW *{Doqqu'bogh Doch loQ vIparHa'} is not possible
because {loQ} would come between the verb and its object.
As it happens, {Doq} is a bad example to use as this ter'eS's example can
easily be rewritten:
loQ Doch Doqqu' vIparHa'
I like the red thing a little bit.
which (to me at least) is quite clear. The other, technically feasible,
translation - "I like the a little bit red thing" - would never even occur
to me unless someone pointed it out.
I've always felt that adverbials affect the clause as a whole because of
Klingon's rigid word order (i.e. adverbials must precede the entire
object-verb-subject string). As Shane has noticed, this occasionally
results in ambiguity:
loQ Doqqu'bogh Doch vIparHa'
1. I like the thing-which-is-a-little-bit-red.
2. I like the thing-which-is-red a little bit.
Does {loQ} modify {Doqqu'bogh} or {vIparHa'}? Without any context we don't
really know, but I would understand it as no. 2.
I searched my files for relative clauses used with adverbials and found one
halfway relevant example:
reH boch qutluch lo'lu'bogh
The used kut'luch is always shiny. TKW
Here {reH} modifies only {boch}, not {lo'}. This does not mean "The
kut'luch-which-is-always-used is shiny" but "The kut'luch-which-is-used is
always-shiny". (A trivial difference, to be sure, and one which doesn't
really change the meaning of the proverb.)
>but you could do it for some of Voragh's other suggestions, eg.
> {tlhoy' Doqqu'mo', loQ vIparHa'.}
> "Because (it) is excessively red, I (only) like it a little."
Shane MiQogh:
> > So, basically, the adverb only affects the first clause?
No. Adverbials affect the clause they are in (my feelings about {-bogh}
clauses excepted). This is what I was trying to show in my examples:
loQ Doqqu'mo', vIparHa'.
Because it is slightly red, I like it.
Doqqu'mo', loQ vIparHa'.
Because it is red, I like it a little (somewhat).
Also... if you want to be absolutely clear, punctuate your Klingon carefully.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons