tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 09 06:57:16 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Another answer from HolQeD
- From: Will Martin <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Another answer from HolQeD
- Date: Fri, 9 Aug 1996 09:56:51 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
I know this is old, but I've been chewing on it a while and
needed to comment.
On Mon, 15 Jul 1996 08:29:50 -0700 "Mark E. Shoulson"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I was reading through the latest HolQeD over the
> weekend...
> Adding -moH to an intransitive is well-ordered and
> neat...
> The subject of the -moHless sentence becomes the
> object of the -moHified one. No problems.
As I see it, the Klingon subject of a -moHified verb
becomes the subject of causation, while the object of the
Klingon -moHified verb becomes the subject of the action of
the root verb.
> But what if you have a sentence that already has an object, and then add
> - -moH to it? ...
> But one answer that was discussed (and
> which I liked) seems to have been accepted as canon now. Look at HolQeD
> 5:2, p. 14. A Skybox card is quoted:
>
> qorDu'Daj tuq 'oS Ha'quj'e' tuQbogh wo'rIv. tuQtaHvIS Hem. ghaHvaD quHDaj
> qawmoH.
>
> The sash that Worf wears is a symbol of his family's house. He wears it
> proudly as a reminder of his heritage.
I find this very confusing without some sort of explanation
from Okrand. Why? Okay, we are dealing with three nouns
here. One is the subject of causation. Another is the
subject of the action of the root verb. The third is the
direct object of the action of the main verb. In this case,
the sash is the subject of causation, Worf is the subject
of the action of the verb and his heritage is the direct
object of the action of the main verb. The sash causes Worf
to remember his heritage.
ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH.
Worf is represented in this sentence by {ghaHvaD}, the
indirect object of the -moHified verb {qaw}. So the subject
of the root verb becomes the indirect object of the
-moHified verb. Interesting, but acceptable. {quHDaj} is
the direct object of the action of the root verb, but here
it remains in the object position, unlike any example of
{-moH} we've seen to date. This is strange.
We also must imagine that the sash has been absorbed into
the Subject position, since that is the only place left in
Klingon grammar to put such a noun. Spelled out, that would
be: ghaHvaD quHDaj qawmoH 'oH.
This implies that if the sash merely caused him to look
good, we could state that as:
ghaHvaD 'IHchoHmoH 'oH.
That becomes the equivalent of:
ghaH 'IHchoHmoH 'oH.
Can this be useful for disambiguating the confusing example
we are given?
HeghqangmoHlu'pu' = It made him/her willing to die.
This could also be stated as:
ghaHvaD HeghqangmoHpu' 'oH.
Or, if we stick to the indefinite subject:
ghaHvaD HeghqangmoHlu'pu'.
So, what we are saying is that the subject of the root verb
can be expressed either as a direct or indirect object, or
as Krankor liked to say, as object, with Klingon not
differentiating between direct or indirect. It only has to
be stated as indirect object if you have to make room for a
direct object of the action of the main verb.
The other meaning many of us would have assumed for the
original example would be better stated as:
Hegh ghaH 'e' qaSqangmoH 'oH.
To give THIS the indefinite subject, it gets stranger:
Hegh ghaH net qaSqangmoH.
Still, I suppose this doesn't get TOO strange. Still,
before these examples become acceptable, I really wish
Okrand would offer a little clarity.
Meanwhile, I'm much more drawn to:
ghaH HoHqanglu'pu'.
Though I guess that doesn't describe willingness to hire an
assasin, though ascribing that to a being incapable of
using language seems odd...
> ~mark
charghwI'