tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 30 08:40:45 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC: jIghItlhqa'laH'a'



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 13:01:55 -0700
>From: [email protected] (CT)

>>Hrm. Actually, it looks as if the above paragraph is wrong (I like to leave
>>such things in my posts [and even finish them if I realize they're wrong in
>>the middle of writing], so people can see the thought-process). I checked
>>TKD again, and it says that "-meH" clauses precede "the noun or verb" they
>>modify. That would imply that it must come directly before the verb.

>vISovbe'bej
>wot DIp joq choHbogh nung "-meH" mu'tlhegh ja' TKD
>'ach nungchu' "-meH" ja'be'
>jojDaq "adverb" lanlu' 'e' chaw'be'lu' ja'chu'be'

>That's exactly the problem. The TKD says that it precedes that which it
>modifies, but it doesn't say that the -meH clause has to be placed 
>-directly- before it. The question is if the -meH clause may be 
>seen as a kind of sentence on its own (like those with 'e' or net). 
>The same problem could occur in expressions using -bogh. 
>In the "famous running man example" an adverb can be found after 
>the -DI' clause, but of course we don't know if all subordinate 
>clauses are treated the same in this respect. 
>I guess they are not. :(
>But it would make the sentences much more understandable.

Well, it's not whether or not -meH clauses can be seen as a kind of clause
of their own; that, I think, is pretty plain (though not quite as with 'e'
or net; more like as with -DI' and -taHvIS).  The question is whether when
Okrand said "verb" he really meant "clause" (since clauses in Klingon are
centered about their verb, the one part that can't be elided).  I like to
believe he did, and I wouldn't be surprised if we found some canon to
support it.  But the TKD text itself doesn't seem to help.  It's more a
matter of whether or not the "verb" being modified can be seen as a
sentence in itself.

The only "running man" example I can think of is "qaStaHvIS wa' ram, loS
SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD", which has no -DI' and no adverbs.  What do
you mean?

~mark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMf4s88ppGeTJXWZ9AQGb8gMArX1C8lWHCnpoI8V7wbLV8Y4LM/T2mq5V
njK4GXL7TZkYwOu26g0D193Lsi8FN/Ut6MG8T8gt2hpMHErDO1hJkUcn8Gflj2FP
a3fCmLpseO2niWy0ZHIYVIbTxgrLDPk1
=/zSA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Back to archive top level