tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 25 02:40:45 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jISuptaH
jatlhchuqtaH charghwI' ghuy'Do wa' je:
>> >Topicallizing "knees" is okay, but not grammatically
>> >needed...
>>
>> Need you even mention this? I'm sure we all understand that {-'e'} has
>> meaning when used outside of mandatory usage. I never topicalize without
good
>> reason, and here I simply wanted to stress that it was my knees that I
>> happened to land on, rather than my feet, which is what I'd intended to
land
>> on.
>Well, I wonder if the idea that you landed on your KNEES was
>really important to the overall thrust of your story. While I
>agree that topicalization is appropriate sometimes in places
>where it is not specifically required by grammatical
>construction, I think you are getting a little loose with it.
>In this post, in particular, it was certainly the most repeated
>suffix. You used it in almost every sentence. I'm going to
>rewrite this paragraph to display the effect in English.
I do admit, I was in a sort of topicalizing mood. But still, there isn't all
*that* much usage of {-'e'} there. It's just that most of us here don't quite
understand when to use {-'e'} because there is no real English equivalent.
{-'e'} is not just for emphasis. If you look at languages that have
equivalents for {-'e'}, you will see that they only indicate new information.
Chinese syntax, for example, is topic prominant, so all Chinese sentences
must have a topic noun. This makes sense because at least one element of the
sentence must convey new information, otherwise the sentence is pointless.
Japanese {wa} is used very similarly to {-'e'}. You will notice that even in
your English, you make a range of pitch variations. Klingon simply relies
less on stress and pitch and more on phonemes like {-'e'} and {-qu'}.
But {-'e'} is so disused that when you or someone reads it twice or more in a
short text, it looks overused.
>Well, I wonder if the IDEA that you landed on your KNEES was
>really important to the overall THRUST of your story. While I
>agree that TOPICALIZATION is appropriate sometimes in places
>where it is not specifically required by grammatical
>construction, I think you are getting a little loose with it.
>In this post, in particular, it was certainly the most repeated
>SUFFIX. You used it in almost every SENTENCE. I'm going to
>rewrite this PARAGRAPH to display the effect in English.
Here you're just topicalizing at random. Again, {-'e'} does not simply stress
a noun, but rather shows that a certain noun conveys new information. It also
shows, as it did with my usage here, that one noun has precedence over
another. It was my *knees*, not my feet, that I landed on. Had I landed on my
feet, my back wouldn't have gotten sprained.
>See what I mean? I suspect that in Klingon, except where
>required by grammar, the {-'e'} suffix should probably appear in
>most contexts once per paragraph or less. Emphasis loses its
>effect if repeated too often. Not only is this density of {-'e'}
>stylistically different from everything in canon and different
>from the writings of everyone else on this list, but it is even
>different from YOUR writings until very recently. You seem to
>be on a {-'e'} kick. I'm not sure that's the best thing to hold
>up as an example for newcomers.
Your claim that it's low density in canon does not convince me, and for this
reason: Okrand is human, and an English-speaking human at that. He does not
speak Klingon fluently. He merely used matlh as an infomant to study the
Klingon language. matlh told him about {-'e'}, but that doesn't mean he
understands exactly when to use it any more than we would. He also uses
{-taH} very sparingly. I don't think I ever remember more than a handful of
usages in CK.
We are the holders of the lisence to create Klingon stylistics. We can decide
which phonemes are more popular than others, and subtle distinctions of
meaning between words.
But again, I may have been topicalizing just a bit too much in my writings.
It's most likely my way of compensating for everyone else's disuse of {-'e'}.
This reminds me of the way that Krankor used to use {-chu'} like a fanatic.
Since that time, his usage has died down and the use of {-chu'} has sort of
soaked out into others' writings.
Criticizing each other's idiodialects is unproductive. What we should focus
on is getting the beginners to use better grammar with more clarity.
Guido#1, Leader of All Guidos