tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 13 13:42:26 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: To -'e' or Not To -'e'
- From: Guido <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: To -'e' or Not To -'e'
- Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 16:42:20 -0400 (EDT)
charghwI' wrote:
>So, I strongly suggest that when I say, {charghwI' 'oH
>pongwIj'e'} or {pongwIj 'oH charghwI''e'}, I'm just saying, "My
>name is charghwI'," and "charghwI' is my name," respectively.
>There is no focus implied. Which noun is the subject and which
>is the object will make a difference in some settings, as in
>when the subject is a memeber of a class of nouns described with
>the object. Otherwise, it becomes less important which is the
>subject and which is the object.
This is the general idea I've always gathered, too. Only objection I would
make is your use of the terms subject and object. Copulae don't have
subjects and objects per se. You normally talk about subjects and
complements with IE langs, but this probably has to do with how their verbs
conjugate by subject concordance. Klingon copulae, of course not being real
verbs to begin with, generally have 'concordance' with the following word
(the one with -'e'), in the sense that you say "mangghomwIj chaH
ghuvwI'pu'vetlh'e'". This is difficult for me to say, but it doesn't seem to
be concordance, just something circumlocutional "until" Klingon gets a true
copulative verb.
Guido