tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 29 17:22:31 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: SopDaq
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: SopDaq
- Date: Tue, 29 Apr 97 23:49:52 UT
[email protected] on behalf of [email protected] wrote:
> << > > "A bed is merely a place to sleep."
> <<pe'>>
>
> QongmeH Daq 'oH neH QongDaq'e'. >>
>
> yIqIm SuStel
> tlhIngan quvwIj DatIchpu'mo' DaH maqaDchuqnIS
maj. nuHlIj DawIvpu', vaj yISuv!
> What part(s) of speech is (are) {ghojmeH taj}?
It is a noun phrase. {-meH} is quite clearly explained in TKD 6.2.4, and
there it says that verbs with {-meH} can modify nouns. {ghojmeH} is a verb,
and {taj} is the noun.
> Does the above sentence using {QongmeH Daq} match your answer?
{QongmeH Daq} is also a noun phrase. "Place for sleeping." {QongmeH} is a
verb, and {Daq} is a noun.
> What do you think about {SopmeH Daq}?
This is also a noun phrase. {SopmeH} is a verb, which modifies the noun
{Daq}. What are you driving at? What has this to do with making up words?
> You asked, in bold capital letters no less, why I should want tlhIngan Hol
to
> expand. Well, you may be satisfied with your stuffy look at using only what
> you have seen Marc Okrand use before you, but I am not so narrow in my
> vision.
Marc Okrand is our only window to view proper Klingon, as spoken by Klingons.
Look to any other source, and it's not "authentic." You may consider that
"stuffy," but I consider it being right.
> While I will never make up new words, leaving that only to MO,
And this indicates that you agree that Okrand is our only true source of
authentic Klingon. Therefore, as I see it, if you continue on your course of
making up phrases, you are *not* being right. Feel reassured that I cannot
call you "stuffy."
> I
> look for ways to translate ideas for which MO's books have not yet given us
> solutions. Often I come up with suggestions for this listserv. Then, they
> usually undergo discussion.
I look for ways to translate ideas for which Okrand's books and other sources
*have* given us solutions. I haven't found anything which I simply cannot
communicate yet.
> But, you just put them down, loudly.
I am not out to insult you; I am simply quite convinced that you are not right
about something, and am willing to stick with that belief.
> You are an excellent BG; you stick to the book strictly and point out what
is
> well-defined. That is ideal for teaching beginners just the way it is.
Actually, I often point out exactly what is *not* well-defined, and put up
signposts for beginners saying "You may be wrong if you say it this way, so
why not try it another way?"
> I want to watch tlhIngan Hol grow just as all Klingons strive for the
> expansion of our glorious Empire!
Okay, here's my problem. You say you should be able to extrapolate and come
up with {SopDaq} as a noun. I say you can't. Either we continue to use what
Okrand has shown us, which is not only official, but is what any Klingonist
can get his or her hands on through his books, or we accept your assumptions
and begin speaking peHruSian. Do you want me to tell beginners that {SopDaq}
is correct? I won't. Especially when it's just not necessary. If you
collaborate with Okrand and publish a book with him, I'll accept what you say.
Until then, you have to convince me that what you say is correct grammar.
You have not done so. Rather, I see an attempt to make learning Klingon
easier for English speakers.
Where do we draw the line about what is really spoken by Klingons? At what
you say? At what I say? At what Lawrence says? Where? How does someone
without Internet access and/or knowledge of this mailing list learn peHruSian?
> Qapla' batlh Sachjaj tlhIngan wo' tlhIngan Hol je
meQtaHbogh qachDaq Suv qoH neH.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97327.8