tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 03 20:06:34 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jIlIH(')egh, etc.
On Fri, 3 Nov 1995, Alan Anderson wrote:
> I wrote:
> >A pronoun being used to mean "to be" does not mean "is the same as".
>
> >"tlhIngan" here means "a Klingon" (which Klingon? Well, the
> >one which I am). It could also mean "I am the Klingon" (say, the one whom
> >you saw your lady with last night), depending on the context.
>
> I don't think context would let me read {tlhIngan jIH} as "I am the Klingon".
> I'd be more comfortable with {tlhInganvetlh jIH} "I am that Klingon" -- which
> is another example like {HoDDaj jIH} where the object is a unique entity, and
> my argument gets very weak trying to deal with these.
It's important to remember that, unlike English, Klingon does not use
articles ("a" & "the") and therefore, whether a noun is referring to
something definite & unique or indefinite & unspecified depends on context.
Examples of a pronoun being used to mean "X is the Y" or "X=Y" or "X is
the same as Y" are:
veH Qav 'oH logh'e'. (Space is the final frontier.) (Trading card DSN #99)
tlhIngan wo' Degh 'oH Deghvam'e'. (This symbol is the symbol of the
Klingon Empire.) (Trading card SP1)
These sentences could alternatively be translated as "Space is a final
frontier" or "This symbol is a symbol of the Klingon Empire" but it would
be inaccurate to translate these sentences this way in the context they
appear in.
> ~mark writes:
> >I think it's pretty clear that pronouns-as-nouns are fairly normal copulae,
> >capable of indicating that X=Y. We have "SoH 'Iv" as canon for "who are
> >you"; "who" and "you" are plainly in appostion here, and whichever one is
> >acting as the verb here it's behaving just as Mark claims.
>
> I didn't find {SoH 'Iv} in TKD; where does it come from?
I'm curious too. I've seen this quoted often but I don't recall seeing
it in canon.
> -- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj
yoDtargh