tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 17 13:39:28 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: -bogh
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: -bogh
- Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 16:39:21 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> (message from Riku Anttila on Fri, 17 Mar 1995 03:24:09 -0500)
>Date: Fri, 17 Mar 1995 03:24:09 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: Riku Anttila <[email protected]>
>This was discussed not-so-long-ago, but I missed the conclusion
>if there was one. I'd appreciate if someone found the time to
>answer.
I don't think there was one.
>Let's have a lousy example: {puq qIppu'bogh yaS} it means nothing,
>there is no indicated head noun. With an -'e', I could indicate the
>head noun. So, what if I need to use another type 5 noun suffix,
>for example {-vaD}?
No, it doesn't mean "nothing"; it's merely ambiguous. Okrand himself used
"Hov ghajbe'bohj ram rur pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj" in Power Klingon, using
relative clauses with no head-noun marked. He relied on context to
disambiguate. I think we worry far too much about being unambiguous.
As to the question, this is the famous "ship in which I fled" question.
It's been wrangled with to death on this very list, repeatedly. I have not
heard of a final and satisfactory conclusion. It's something we need to
discuss with Okrand (there's lots about relative clauses that need to be
discussed). For starters, *can* the head-noun be something other than the
subject or object of the relative clause? Not all languages allow this.
Nick Nicholas has said that there's a hierarchy; an ordering of what is
permitted in languages as head-nouns. I think some only allow subjects and
maybe objects. Others bring in indirect objects, etc... and last of all
things in possession (i.e. "the captain whose ship was destroyed"). Once
we find out if and how to mark the head-noun properly, we start to wonder
about what if the function of the head-noun in the main sentence differs
from its function in the relative clause (I was in the ship from which you
had walked. Dujvo' bIyItpu'. DujvamDaq jIHtaH. Could I do that in a
single relative clause? Good question).
I can't give you an answer, since I don't know that we have one.
~mark