tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 29 10:18:01 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Placement of qatlh (Was: Re: nuqneH)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Placement of qatlh (Was: Re: nuqneH)
- Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 13:19:28 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Wed, 29 May 1996 09:24:57 -0700 Robyn Stewart
<[email protected]> wrote:
> charghwI' caught my error:
> & > But if he said "nuqneH," I'd be likely to say "nuq DaneH
> & > SoH? HIq jItlhutlh vIneH. qatlh tachDaq jIba' 'e' DaQub jay'?"
> & Try {tachDaq jIba' qatlh 'e' DaQub jay'?!}...
> I see now why qatlh was in the wrong place. Could I
> also put {jay'} between {jIba'} and {qatlh} in your corrected
> version?
HIja'.
> In English, the sentence, "Why do you think the targ killed the spy?"
> could mean either, "What makes you think the targ killed the spy?" OR
> "What do you think caused the targ to kill the spy?"
>
> Is the same true for <ghoqwI' HoH targh qatlh 'e' DaQub?> ?
ghobe'. "The targ killed the spy. Why do you think that?" -> "What causes you to think that
the targ killed the spy." In Klingon, for the other meaning, I'd just say, {qatlh ghoqwI'
HoH targh?"} If I'm saying that to you, you don't need to be a linguist or a rocket
scientist to know that I'm asking for your opinion. You might be tempted to stretch grammar
and use {nuqmo'...}, but we don't know that you can use noun suffixes on {nuq}, and you are
not really creating any new expression of meaning not implied in {qatlh}.
I guess you could say, {qatlh ghoqwI' HoH targh? nuq DaQub? vuDlIj vIneH. DaH!} but that
sounds just a little verbose and redundent. Talk a lot like that and most Klingons in
listening range might consider filtering out your contribution to the gene pool...
> Would <qatlh ghoqwI' HoH targh 'e' DaQub.> mean "You are thinking
> about why the targ killed the spy." ?
I see pairing a question with {'e' DaQub} as a linguistic curiosity of sufficient
markedness as to cause me to be a wee bit shy about uttering it among Klingons I do not
know well. Responses may vary. It just sounds like you are psychoanalyzing the person you
are speaking to, telling him or her what question you think he or she is considering. Even
then, it seems like a verb better suited to questions might be better, like {tlhob}. You
tend to ask questions, not think them. Hmmm. Perhaps it might be a way of referring to
something unexpressed but held inside? I can't say for sure. This would be something which
would either follow or run counter to convention, but we lack enough canon to know just
what the convention would be here.
> & charghwI'
> wovwI'Robyn Stewart - NLK Consultants Inc. - [email protected]
charghwI'