tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 12 23:45:47 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: noun + noun : `of the' or `which equals'?
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: noun + noun : `of the' or `which equals'?
- Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 01:50:03 -0500
A.Appleyard writes:
>>...your title should technically be {jubwI' HoD}...
>
>This sounds like more aggro resulting from not having a separate construction
>to say "the X which is a Y" where X and Y are both nouns. {Duj X} could also
>mean "the spaceship's X"; {X Duj} could also mean "the X's spaceship" -
>whichever is used to mean "the spaceship named X"...
True; but we can live with the ambiguity. After all, {Duj X} can also
mean "the instincts' X" and {X Duj} can also mean "X's instincts"; why
is the "rank follows a name" rule or the apparent "appositive names can
come either before or after the description" rule a special problem?
>...or "the spaceship which is an X".
I don't see {X Duj} or {Duj X} carrying this meaning at all.
>Is {X ghaHbogh Y} correct for "the Y which is an X"?
It looks grammatical (with {-'e'} on the appropriate noun), but I'd go to
some lengths to avoid saying anything this way.
>batlh Hegh yoHbogh; 'ach yIn veS nejbe'bogh 'ej Qulbogh loDpu' Sep, 'ej vaj
>puSpa' qu'ghach boghmoHviS boghpu'bogh.
nuqjatlh?
"Honor's death which (s)he be-braves; but the war which (s)he doesn't seek
lives and (s)he breeds people who research, and thus before fierceation is
few while[*] [?] which has been born gives birth."
>(The brave die with honour [in
>battle]; but those who do not seek war live and breed men who resemble them [=
>like breeds like], and thus [the amount of] fierceness becomes less while
>those who have been born give birth [= as generations pass].)
I don't think so (I'm referring to the grammar, not the sentiment).
A verb with {-bogh} is part of a relative clause, which modifies a noun.
If you leave off the noun, you have nothing for the verb to attach to. A
nearby noun can easily get inappropriately "sucked up" in the translation,
and in the absence of nearby nouns there's really no translation possible.
TKD's definition of {-bogh} as a "relative clause marker" refers to section
6.2.3, which quite clearly indicates that a relative clause is always used
with an explicitly stated "head noun".
There are several minor mistakes which serve to confuse this further;
"resemble" is {rur}, not {Qul} (an obvious dictionary lookup error),
{-pa'} indicates "before" where you wanted {-choH} "becomes", and the
suffix {-vIS} is always accompanied by the suffix {-taH}. Using {-ghach}
on a naked verb stem also tends to distract my attention from the meaning
and focus it on the unusual construction of the word.
>I.e. a society
>like the Klingons is likely to get less aggressive and more orderly as many
>generations pass.
chaq teH ngerlIj Sachbe'choHchugh nughvetlh. reH 'Iw luHummoHtaH qaD chu'.
Only if it stops expanding! New frontiers and new challenges will always
maintain the society's aggressiveness.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj