tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 18 10:18:39 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {-meH} and {Sov} (was Re: KLBC: starting right back...)
>Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 12:07:32 -0800
>From: [email protected]
>In a message dated 95-12-16 04:22:10 EST, you write:
>{ghojpu'} definitely covers "have learned [how to]." {Sov} (v) "knows"; in
>the appendix it is also a (n) "knowledge." This implies that {Sov} covers
>the concept of having the knowledge of (perhaps how to) do something.
> Contrast this with {ghov} (v) "knows [someone]." Spanish, for example, uses
>"conocer" vs. "saber." But, Spanish does not have to use "ha/.../han
>aprendido/a" to indicate knowing.
Not quite true. I realize that it would make sense to have different words
in Klingon for "knowing a fact" and "knowing a person" (cf. Spanish,
Hebrew, French, etc, etc). But once again you're confusing what you expect
with what is given to us. "ghov" is glossed as "recognize"." It is
*NOWHERE* (except in your postings) given as the "correct" way t talk about
"knowing a person." What's more, we have canon evidence that "knowing a
person" is expressed using "Sov" and not "ghov." Listen to CK, in the
scene where the tourist is going through customs on Qo'noS. They ask
"Qo'noSDaq vay' DaSov'e'?" (Do you known anyone on Kronos?) and he answers
"ghobe'. Qo'noSDaq vay' vISovbe'" (No, I don't know anyone on Kronos).
Note that this incidentally doesn't use your proposed "-'e'" to reduce the
scope of "-Daq" to apply only to the "vay'" (which it obviously does), and
incidentally also tells us that in Klingon you don't use double-negatives.
But note that it uses "Sov", and NOT "ghov."
~mark