tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 05 21:22:26 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

RE: usage of Hoch and latlh

peHruS says:

>So far, it appears that
>Hoch acts like a number and preceeds the noun.

jImIS -- chu'be'  Dochvam.   qatlh bIja', "mI'  ta'  Hoch?"   ja'chu' 
<<Okrand>>,  "DIp  ta'  mI'."   ja'be' <<Okrand>>, "mI'  ta'be' DIp."

I have discussed this with Glen Proechel.  Why did they believe it should 
follow the noun?  Hoch is a noun and should follow the rules of noun - noun 
constructions.  Numbers are numbers and used like nouns.  I would like to 
share his explanation with you all:

Ken for Glen!

There is a tendency of some to presist in the treacherous error to think in 
terms of "adjectives".  Ajectives are foreign to <<tlhIngan Hol>> and are only 
used to accomodate the grammatical thinking of  people who speak Federation 
Standard.  To understand modification of nouns in Klingon one must reorient 
one's thinking as follows:

A)  Stative Verbs:  When stative verbs FOLLOW the noun to which they refer, 
they resemble English adjectives and can take type 5 noun suffixes.  This 
leads to the confusion that like Spanish the adjective follows the noun.  As 
Worf says, "THIS IS NOT ITALIAN."

B)  Noun-Noun Constructions:  Many concepts which are classified as adjectives 
in English are expressed by noun-noun constructions.  In Klingon the modifying 
noun PRECEDES the primry noun.  It does not follow it.  It is only when the 
noun-noun relationship describes POSSESSION that the thing possessed follows 
it.

This brings up the caveat -- POSSESSION must not be confused with PARTITIVE.  
Partitive nouns, which show a "part of a whole" relationship (few, any, all) 
come before the noun they modify: <<Hoch tlhIngan>> -- All Klingons (also All 
of the Klingons).  Hoch is an NOUN and would follow the noun-noun 
construction.  In the case of some Klingons <<tlhIngan puS>> or several 
Klingons <<tlhIngan Sar>>, the modifiers FOLLOW the noun.  Not because they 
are adjectives, but because they are Stative Verbs. 

Much has been made over Okrand's use of <<HochHom>> in the phrase "most of the 
23rd century."  First, one must note that Hoch and HochHom are two separate 
words.  HochHom is a very clever construction and literally means 
"near-entirety".  He chose to translate this phrase as a POSSESSIVE NOT a 
partitive.  Thus the phrase would read, "The 23rd century's near-entirety".  
Partitives DO NOT and CANNOT follow the nouns they modify.

For example, Mark Shoulson recommended that one say, "tlhIngan bID jIH" for "I 
am half-Klingon."  The problem with this is that it would REALLY say,  "I am a 
Klingon's one half."  If you are trying to use noun-noun constructions to show 
possession, a reality check is, "what happens if you put an imaginary 
"apostrophe - s" ('s) between two nouns (As I did with Mark's translation).  
"Half-Klingon" does not show possession.  Further one-half is not an 
adjective, because there are no adjectives in Klingon.  The correct 
translation would be,  "bID tlhIngan jIH."

((((I had to retype it so I apologize if there are mistakes.))))

**** he goes on with another lecture on numbers as <<chuvmey>> used like 
nouns, but I'll save this for later maybe!

Back to archive top level