tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 13 12:59:28 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: HolQeD miscellanea

>Comments on HolQeD 3:1.

>1. naDev juHlIjDaq, contrary to Krankor's claim, is not an apposition. He
>quotes the definition of 'apposition' as "the second [term...] has the
>same grammatical construction as the first". naDev is a locative adverb.
>juHlIjDaq is a prepositional phrase. They are both the same *semantically*
>(locatives), but not *syntactically* --- certainly nothing to do with
>the noun-noun couplings discussed. My intuition, incidentally, is that
>appositions are *not* Klingon.

Why do you say that? Appositions would be just as useful in tlhIngan as any
other language. I was planning to write up an article for HolQeD on them.

>naDev juHlIj, furthermore, makes perfect sense as an N-N construction, if
>we interpret the N-N relation in a sensibly loose fashion. If bIng juH
>means "the house below", then naDev juH means "the house in *this* area".
>Remember, naDev is a noun as well as an adverb; "here" in English is
>not a noun --- but "this area" is (a noun phrase).

I see your point. But am not thoroughly convinced. I consider {naDev} to be
intrinsicly locative. Two consecutive locatives are valid as appositional in
my book. You'll find at least one (maybe two, but I'm not sure) of these such
constructions in ~mark's _Jonah_.

[...]
>6. p. 17. Jonathan Van Hoose's suggestion seems to me pretty high priority
>for discussion amongst the HoDpu' here it would affect...

I just don't know what to make out of {tlha HoD} anymore. I most definitely
heard the rank after the name. However I also heard such phrases as *{wa'
tlhIngan je wa' romuluSngan}.

I lean towards thinking that the rank should precede the name, as in English,
since {Qugh HoD} would really mean "Kruge's captain". {HoD Qugh} would
eliminate ambiguity to a greater extent.

Back to archive top level