tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 23 07:26:02 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

themscrewyrelativeclauses

>From: Will Martin <[email protected]>
>Date: Tue, 23 Nov 93 08:49:42 EST


>On Nov 23,  2:46am, [email protected] wrote:
>> Subject: Re: themscrewyrelativeclauses
>> 
>> Ok, so your suggestion for relative clauses is to use one of the normal
>> pronouns to indicate how the head noun is used in the main clause:
>> {DujDaq jIHaw'pu'bogh 'oHvaD nIn vISuq}
>> I almost agree. It would seem to me that maybe Klingon uses another
>> special pronoun that functions sort of like one of English's relative
>> pronouns. Let's identify it as X:
>> {XDaq jIHaw'pu'bogh DujvaD nIn vISuq}

>My problem with this is that it looks to me like "For the
>benefit/purpose of the place of the ship from which I escaped, I get fuel." I
>think it lacks the clear sense that the ship was used in order to escape.
>"DujDaq jIHaw'pu'bogh" is confusing. "At the ship - which I escaped (no
>object) - for it - I get it." It just doesn't tie together for me. I clearly
>understand the "I get fuel for it," part. That makes sense, but the focus of
>the example ("the ship in which I escaped") does not make it through my thick
>forehead. I don't see that meaning in those words.

Well, think of it this way.  Rather than considering "DujDaq jIHaw'pu'bogh"
as separate ideas, i.e. one is the place of the main clause and one is its
object, which is how you seem to be viewing them (think about it, that's
close to what you said), put them together.  Your view is a valid one, but
Klingon's an ambiguous language, so it's not the only one.  Drop the
"-bogh".  Now you have "DujDaq jIHaw'pu'".  Can you see this as meaning "I
fled in the ship"?  "-bogh" is a verb-suffix, yes, but it affects the whole
*sentence* it's attached to: "yaS vIquppu'bogh" sucks in "yaS" as well,
making it "the officer whom I hit".  So too, in this case, "DujDaq
jIHaw'pu'bogh" is a noun-phrase specifying some noun in the sentnence "I
fled in the ship".  The pragmatically obvious choice in most cases is the
ship, so it makes sense to view it as "the ship in which I fled".  If you
remember that "-bogh" turns a *sentence* into a noun-phrase, you'll see
where we're coming from.

Hmmm.  I didn't mean to sound so prescriptive; there's still some
disagreement as to whether or not a "-bogh" phrase can represent anything
other than its subject or object.  COnsider the above as an explanation
from the point of view that it can (a point of view I personally espouse).

>--   chargwI'


~mark

Back to archive top level