tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 16 10:12:24 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New Method for Superlative?
- From: "Garrett Michael Hayes" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: New Method for Superlative?
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 13:08:52 -0400
- Organization: Client/Server Labs
- Priority: normal
On 16 Apr 96 at 9:14, William H. Martin wrote:
> According to Garrett Michael Hayes:
>
> > 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,
<pe'>
> not in the sense of "better than all others", but as in "among the
> very best" which certainly fits the meaning of that example.
jIyaj
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 focu 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}.
I think I follow most of what you are saying here. And I certainly
understand on reflection that the first example could correctly be
inpterpreted to refer to a "high quality" sword.
The second example does not however seem to me to be subject to that
reforming. "Revenge is (a) very good revenge" doesn't carry the same
feel as "Revenge is the best revenge" at all. The phrase as cast
certainly seems to be a superlative to me.
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)