tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 14 07:10:09 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: starting right back at the beginning :)
>Date: Wed, 13 Dec 1995 21:24:20 -0800
>From: "R.B Franklin" <[email protected]>
>On Wed, 13 Dec 1995, Alan Anderson wrote:
>I don't think {chay'} or other question words can be used as conjunctions
>the way they are used English. Sec.6.4 says that words such as {chay'}
>(how), {nuqDaq} (where), & {'Iv} (who) are used for asking questions.
>Although many people on this list use Klingon question words this way, my
>belief is that this usage is incorrect. There is nothing in TKD or
>elsewhere which would suggest that these words can double as conjunctions.
>I belive it is wrong to use Klingon question words to translate sentences
>like:
>She knows HOW to repair the engine.
>I know HOW to get to the Great Hall.
>I don't know WHO that officer is.
>We don't know WHERE the enemy's base is.
>I know WHERE he was buried.
>I would use nouns instead to fulfill that role:
>jonta' tI'meH mIw Sov. (In order to fix the engine, she knows the
> procedure.)
>vaS'a' ghoSlu'meH He vISov. (In order for one to go towards the Great Hall,
> I know the route.)
>yaSvetlh pong vISovbe'. (I don't know the name of that officer.)
>jagh waw' Daq wISovbe'. (We don't know the location of the enemy's base.)
>ghaH mollu'pu'. Daq vISov. (He was buried. I know the location.)
It's not clear what the rule is on this. I think it's one of the things on
the infamous Okrand wish-list: what about some relative pronouns? In fact,
I'm sure it's on the list.
We have long been using question-words for them, NOT in an attempt to
mirror the style of English, which happens to have the same words for
relative and interrogative pronouns, but rather as an attempt to use two
sentences in sentence-as-subject relationship (with a little idiomatic
usage thrown in):
chay' jonta' tI' 'e' Sov. (How does she fix the engine? She knows
that. [i.e. she knows the answer to that question])
chay' vaS'a' ghoSlu' 'e' Sov (How does one go to the Great Hall? He
knows that [the answer to that].)
yaS 'Iv 'e' vISovbe'. (Who is the officer? I don't know that.)
nuqDaq 'oH jagh waw' 'e' wISovbe' (Where is the enemy's base? We
don't know that)
nuqDaq mollu'pu' 'e' vISov (Where was he buried? I know that.)
Note that I might just as well have punctuated these sentences as "chay'
jonta' tI'? 'e' Sov", but punctuation is something that is added into the
Roman orthography we use, and it is up to the writer to add it in to
taste.
One consequence of this method is that it leads to one construction which
does not mirror English:
I don't know if she has arrived.
pawpu''a' 'e' vISovbe'. (Has she arrived? I don't know that).
And not anything with "-chugh".
Note that your sentences/methods are not wrong. In some situations they
would indeed be preferable (IMO) to the method I've outlined here. But
consider this method as well; we've been playing with it quite a bit. I
know Krankor likes it, and is adamant that it's not a mirror of English,
but rather relies on "smoothing out" the juncture between two sentences in
Klingon when translating to English, which happens all the time anyway.
~mark