tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 15 16:30:31 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: -chuq and Object?
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: -chuq and Object?
- Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 16:30:33 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
According to Qov:
..
>> I personally have no problem with {lut wIja'}. I am not, however,
>> supposed to be teaching the beginners to write in the Qovian
>> SuStelian OR charghwI'Ian dialects. I'm supposed to be teaching
>> them to write Klingon that is acceptable to all the grammarians.
>> SuStel is strongly opposed to {ja'} taking an object other than
>> the person addressed. I have no problem with subordinate clauses
>> going anywhere Okrand says they may. charghwI' won't accept them
>> anywhere other than at the beginning.
>
> I did not intend to set off this kind of response, but accept
> it all the same.
What you've taken as wrath was written, as a simple statement of my
position on the issue. There weren't even any typos in it: I must
have been calm. :-) The message I was trying to express was that
there are many controversial points, that one generally chooses a
position on them in order to use the language freely, but that I have
to step in from my position in some directions to make sure my work
is inside the lines defined by those respected here as experts.
> Meanwhile, this is a misrepresentation of my
> position. While I do think subordinate clauses parse a lot
> easier at the beginning of a sentence, I too accept them any
> place Okrand says they mey go.
Acknowledged. Perhaps I should have said "charghwI' rarely accepts a
trailing subordinate clause *without commenting that it would be
more 'Klingon' if it led the main clause.*" If I were teaching the
Qovian dialect I would never comment on the position of subordinate
clauses (other than with {-meH}) in KLBCs. In deference to your
position, I sometimes do.
> Our disagreement is over subordinate clauses based upon the
> verb suffix {-mo'}. Okrand never told us where they may go.
> Perhaps they may go anywhere {-taHvIS} or the other listed Type
> 9 suffixes can go, though if I remember properly, all Type 9
> suffixes can't follow the main clause. He lists the ones that
> can. {-mo'} is a weird case because it was not invented until
> the appendix. There, it is said to behave much like the noun
> suffix {-mo'}.
I don't believe I'd recognized before that you had one subordinate
clause you wanted at the beginning more than others. Now I know.
> I accept your wrath, but prefer to have my position accurately
> represented.
Can I save up the wrath acceptance for sometime I need it, or does it
just expire? I do not deny that I have snits, but this was not one.
>> I work around both
>> restrictions. If someone wants to write Klingon that is
>> unacceptable to one or more of the grammarians, that's his
>> choice.
>
> And if the current BG cares to get in a snit over an attempt to
> help by a former BG, that's her choice.
The "his" in that sentence was the old fashioned mixed gender
singular. I should have used the awkward "his/her" or the
increasingly accepted "their." I was talking about any given
beginner, not targetting you.
I do accept that Klingonists will make choices that go against the
beliefs of some grammarians. I don't agree with everything all the
grammarians believe about Klingon. When I write or speak Klingon
without my BG hat on I am not so conservative. My words "that's his
choice" had NO implied "but I don't agree" or "he's an idiot"
attached. My meaning was that that if a Klingonist beginning on this
list continues to use controversial grammar it should be because he
or she has made an informed choice, and not because I have neglected
to tell him or her that everyone doesn't accept it.
I try to follow up to other BGs follow-ups to my postings if I think
a distinction needs to be made between an error on my part --several
lately from KGT material I didn't know-- and a point of controversy.
Maybe you and the other BGs can help make this distinction by
including a phrase like "I know that not everyone agrees with me" or
"this remains a point of controversy" when appropriate.
- Qov