tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 16 09:09:41 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New Method for Superlative?
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: New Method for Superlative?
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 12:08:37 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Garrett Michael Hayes" at Apr 16, 96 05:41:50 am
According to Garrett Michael Hayes:
>
> On page 101 Okrand writes <'etlh QorghHa'lu'chugh ragh 'etlh nIvqu'
> 'ej jejHa'choH>, which he translates as "Even the best blade will
> rust and grow dull unless it is cared for."
qay'be'.
> And on page 121 he writes <bortaS nIvqu' bortaS'e'>, which he
> translates as "Revenge is the best revenge".
AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Qu'vatlh! Whose side is this guy on? We now have the use of a
stative verb used transitively in a parallel construction to
the use of pronouns with an explicit subject.
[The sound of charghwI''s brain being tweaked] Oh. I get it.
Cool.
> In both cases, the verb <nIv> with the emphatic suffix <qu'> appears
> to serve the adjectival function of the english word "best".
Not quite. The first example uses it adjectivally, and it is
easy to argue that in the area of "very superior" or even "too
superior", since {-qu'} has been translated both as "very" and
as "too" in previous examples, it is easy to translate that as
"best", not in the sense of "better than all others", but as in
"among the very best" which certainly fits the meaning of that
example. In the second example, {nIvqu'} is not being used
adjectivally. It is being used as a stative verb.
The new part in the second example is the first use of a
structure parallel to:
HoD ghaH Qanqor'e'.
While it is interesting, I see it leading to really horrendous
things like:
Duj tIn DujwIj'e'.
This, of course, SHOULD be the simpler:
tIn DujwIj.
Meanwhile, with all the English focus on "to be", it is only a
matter of time.
mu'tlhegh qabqu' chovnatlhvetlh'e'.
This specimen is a very bad sentence.
Of course, if we ARE trying to argue that the second example is
using {nIv} adjectivally, and so there technically is no verb
in the sentence at all, we go back to the "Me Tarzan. You
Jane," interpretation of the use of pronouns as verbs, since,
despite the use of verbal suffixes, the pronoun either does not
need to be interpreted as a verb, or it could be considered to
be adjectivally attached to the noun we have been interpreting
as its object. [the sound of more tweaking]
Whatever the case, this is indeed VERY new and perhaps very
disturbing. We live in interesting times.
> Do we have a new mechanism for expressing superlatives?
No. Again, "very superior" easily translates to "among the very
best". If you really want a superlative, you still need to use
{law'/puS} and {Hoch}.
> 'etlhqengwI'
>
> Garrett Michael Hayes
> Client/Server Labs; 8601 Dunwoody Place, Suite 332, Atlanta, GA 30350
> [email protected], http://www.cslinc.com; 770-552-3645 voice, 770-993-4667 fax
> (Opinions expressed are my own and may not be those of Client/Server Labs, LLC)
>
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |