tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 13 11:48:10 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nIDwIj wa'DIch
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Fri, 13 Sep 1996 05:12:34 -0700
>From: [email protected] (Bill Willmerdinger)
>(Since this message goes beyong the scope of KLBC, I've removed the KLBC
>header.)
> > From: ur-valhalla!acsinc.net!triqal (HoD trI'Qal)
> > Subject: (KLBC) Re: nIDwIj wa'DIch
> > Unfortunately, your one grammatical error here was something we
> > probably should have int eh FAQ as a warning: the use of the verb
> > <pong> has not been fully described to us, so we aren't really sure
> > how to use it.
>While I fully agree that {*Qob* 'oH pongwIj'e'} is the "safe" way to say "My
>name is Qob", I think it's time we stopped fighting over the "instinctive" use
>of {pong}. The original argument against using {pong} to say "I name my son
>'Qob'" was that this requires apposition ("son" and "Qob" are in apposition).
>However, with Skybox card S26 {lurSa be'etor je}, we have a canon example of
>apposition: {... DuraS be'nI'pu' lurSa be'etor je}, translated as "the sisters
>of Duras, Lursa and B'Etor". I personally have no problem (now) with saying
>{*Qob* puqloDwI' vIpong}.
I don't think it's so simple. The case of "I name my son Qob" is NOT
apposition. Apposition implies that the two nouns are referring to the
same thing. Apposition would be "I name my son, Qob, queen of the may."
The name and the named are not in apposition "I name my son Qob," since the
person named is a person, and the name is mentioned (not used) and is
considered in the sentence as a string of sounds, not as a referent to a
person. It's not the same as apposition. I think it's called a
predicative case or something (same as "I painted the wall blue.")
>We also have a canon use of the verb {pong} on S27 {Qo'noS}. This card
>contains the sentence {roD 'oHvaD juHqo' ponglu' neH}. While this sentence is
>combined with another in the English translation ("What is a single sentence
>in ENglish is often two in Klingon") the translation is fairly evident:
>"(Qo'noS) is usually refered to as simply "The Homeworld". To me, {juHqo'
>ponglu'} quite clearly says "someone calls it 'the Homeworld'". (I do admit
>to uncertainty about what {'oHvaD} is doing in there; it certainly seem
>redundant, and we've discussed the meaning of {roD} before.)
Ah, no. The 'oHvaD *is* important; it answers the question: the thing
named is flagged with -vaD and the name is the object of the verb "pong".
Removing the confusing -lu', we get "puqloDwI'vaD *Qob* vIpong." See? The
person (or planet) get -vaD, and the name (or description) is the object.
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBMjmsYcppGeTJXWZ9AQHV+gL9EitZ0l0wgbRk/g+ftIJnSVdCh54q8sXV
FzeEGq6U2zQ4DRyYmTUD/EUaSfySzRg5dsLL3XiZfUeLcgFILOVGcByvBK7iPYqi
9VP1ggmL6l1gy61Pkx/zQDWNYguEIMmo
=9Xfc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----