tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 12 22:18:14 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: new here
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: RE: new here
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 1996 00:21:51 -0500
According to Kenneth Traft:
>bID is a noun and according to the rules of noun consturctions it should be
>placed before the modifying noun.
I don't follow you. What do you mean by a "modifying noun"? If you consider
"Klingon" to be a modifying noun in "Klingon language", the "modifying noun"
comes first.
> To say tlhIngan bID implies that bID is a
>verb of aspect. The same would be true with Hoch.
That's not necessarily true. The problem is that for a long time we didn't
have any explanation of how to say something like "all of the books", or
"half of a pipius." It's not quite the same thing as the "possessive" that
the noun-noun construction is supposed to represent, but it's got the same
"Y of the X" form. So the argument went something like this: "'All of the
books' should be {paqmey Hoch}, and 'half a pipius' is {pIpyuS bID}." And
we got apparent confirmation of this construction on a Skybox cards, with
"most of the 23rd century" being {tera' vatlh DIS poH cha'maH wej HochHom}
(Skybox card S15 as reprinted in HolQeD 4:3).
And then The Klingon Way went and said things like {Hoch 'ebmey tIjon} for
"Capture all opportunities." Now it seems that either {Hoch} acts like a
number or there is some hitherto unknown grammar at work.
>Of course you'd treat bID
>as a now because it is. 1/2 is a number like 1, 2, 3, etc. It would seem to
>have to follow the same characteristics (TKD section 5.2)
TKD doesn't say {bID} is a number. {wa'} is a number, but {bID} is just a
noun. Until we find out why {Hoch} is used in front of nouns, there isn't
a good argument in favor of using {bID} the same way.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj