tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 10 14:05:12 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Good day to die.
>From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 1994 17:54:31 -0400
>>From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
>>Date: Fri, 7 Oct 94 17:26:51 EDT
>>Subject: Re: Good day to die.
>>
>>According to Thornton Rose:
>>>
>>> 2. -vam mean "this" and "jaj" is "day (n)". So, wouldn't j"jajvam" mean
>>> "this day"?
>>
>>I feel uneasy about this because the locative suffix {-vam}
>>indicates location in space. {jaj} has no location in space. It
>>has a temporal "location". In English, we mix these two concepts
>>together all the time. We have no reason that I know of in
>>Klingon to feel comfortable doing the same. I can put a paper
>>clip in my hand and say, {mavjopvam} and even though the floor
>>may be covered with paper clips, you will know to WHICH paper
>>clip I refer. How do I point to a {jaj}? I can't hold it in my
>>hand. I can't lean up against it and pat it with my palm. I
>>can't point to it.
>My copy of TKD says "Like its English translation, this suffix indicates
>that the noun refers to an object which is nearby or which is the topic
>of the conversation." Same for -vetlh. -vam and -vetlh are not locative,
>they're specificative (if that's a word)...
A good point, and I can't really disallow "jajvam" (having used "ramvam"
occasionally myself, tho in truth DaHjaj ram would be better). But for
"today", you should really consider the normal usage: DaHjaj is given for
"today" in TKD. "jajvam" would be more like "this day" in English, which
means about the same thing, but sounds affected.
And no, I would *NOT* assume that you can say "*DaHram" for "tonight", any
more than you can say "*toafternoon" in English.
>>I have only two minor, but successfully nagging problems with
>>this. We already have the word {DaHjaj} which points out which
>>day we indicate without using the English-centric {jajvam'e'}
>>that confuses location in space and time. Why insist on using
>>{jajvam'e'}?
Thanks for catching it too, charghwI'; I was worried I was the only one who
had it in the dictionary!
>...Paul
~mark