tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 18 15:12:33 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New Method for Superlative
- From: Consulat General de Pologne <#[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: New Method for Superlative
- Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 18:11:54 EDT
"Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Meanwhile, with all the English focus on "to be", it is only a
> >matter of time.
>
> >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.
>
> I don't think it needs to be so scary. There are ways of understanding
> this without postulating "Duj tIn DujwIj'e'."
>
> For starters, consider Welsh. Welsh has a perfectly good "to be" verb,
> used as a copula, at least as consistent and compulsory as English. "I
> captain" makes as little sense in Welsh as it does in English.
> Nonetheless, in Welsh *proverbs*, it's extremely common to find "X is Y"
> constructions that leave out the verb. It's a characteristic style of
> proverbs (the only example I can come up with off the top of my head:
> Cenedl heb iaith, cenedl heb galon: A nation without a language [is] a
> nation without a heart.) There are gobs of others. This doesn't prove
> anything for Klingon, but it does show how it's conceivable for a language
> to use copulae regularly and still lack them for certain styles of speech
> (proverbs).
I can add my two little pennies (2 grosze) from my courtyard:
In Polish in daily use (not only for some certains styles of speech as
proverbs) we have at a disposal two constructions:
1) with a copula "to be" - but then the subject is in Nominative case and the
predicate is in Instrumental case.
Ja jestem kapitanem. Oni sa, mal/ymi dziec'mi.
I am a captain. They are little children.
Mal/e dzieci nie sa, kapitanami.
Little children aren't captains.
This construction is also used with verbs {zostac'} and (stac' sie,}
= "to become".
2) without a copula - but then the place of the copula is occupied by a
demonstrative pronoun {to} meaning "this" or "that" or (rarely) "it"
(it's used in it's singular form independently whether the subject is
singular or plural).
Both subject and predicate are in Nominative case.
The intonation is that of the a two clause sentence, with a slight pause
after the subject.
Ja to kapitan. Oni to mal/e dzieci. Mal/e dzieci to nie kapitanowie.
I - captan. They - little children. Little children - not captains.
This construction is most often used fot definitions.
But what does it have to do with tlhIngan Hol?
By the time I have written this I have completely forgotten the starting
point of the discussion, and having already deleted the lines concerned
I cannot remind myself of it. When I read the digest again maybe I shall
remind of what I wanted to say.
reH Suvrup SuvwI''a'.
Qapla'
macheq
=========================================================================
lasciate ogni speranza voi qu'entrate
=========================================================================