tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 17 18:34:09 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC mu'ghomHomwIj vIlo'be'
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC mu'ghomHomwIj vIlo'be'
- Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 18:35:06 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
DloraH writes:
>>}'ach qaStaHvIS poH nI' *winter* 'oHtaHmo' tujqa'be'.
>>}But it won't because it'll be winter for a long time.
>>
>>You're thinking in English here. "It will be winter." What is "it"?
>>There is no it. It's an English idiom. Perhaps:
>
>[it] is a pronoun being used in place of the noun <season> or
><weather>
I disagree. That "it" has no antecedent. When we say "it" is hot,
cold, winter, stuffy in here, night, raining, snowing, foggy, windy,
broad daylight, etc. we can come up with some noun that can awkwardly
be inserted into the sentence instead of the it, but the result
doesn't sound very natural.
>>}ram 'oHtaH 'ej Do' juHwIjDaq tuj.
>>}It's night and fortunately it's warm in my house.
>>
>>There's that "it" again. Twice. :) First clause looks more like
>>"it's trivial."
>>
>>Perhaps {DaH taH ram}. Maybe you can think of something better.
>
>The first [it] is a pronoun replacing the noun for [time] or
>something along that idea. The second [it] is pronoun for
>[temperature].
It isn't normal to put in pronouns replacing nouns that have never
been used, unless the purpose of the sentence it to call attention to
the anonymity of the thing or person identified by the pronoun.
>The [it's trivial] doesn't work because putting
>[-taH] on ['oH] makes ['oH] the verb of the sentence, forcing [ram]
>to be a noun [night].
Good point. But then I get "It is [a|the] night" WHAT is a night?
Pronouns require antecedents.
>BUT, yes; I agree that there is a
>to express this sentence.
>
>You say (here and in past messages) that many uses of [it] in
>english are idiom, when I see that many of them are acting as legal
>pronouns refering to something. You have said before that to say
>[it's raining], we need to use something like [atmosphere] : [SIS
>muD]. Well, ['oH] is a pronoun, it can replace a noun in a sentence;
>giving us : [SIS 'oH]
Actually, I don't like {SIS muD} much. I'm with charghwI' on
{SISlu'}. I'd accept {SIS}, but when the pronoun {'oH} is stated, I
want to know its antecedent.
>>...fortunately it's warm in my house.
>[Do' juHwIjDaq tuj Hat] [...the temperature is hot...] lugh'a'?
>[Hat]-noun ['oH]-pronoun (which can replace nouns)
>[Do' juHwIjDaq tuj 'oH] lugh'a'?
>drop the redundant ['oH] brings us back to
>Do' juHwIjDaq tuj.
Did I bite at {Do' juHwIjDaq tuj}? I don't mind it now.
I believe that there is a right way to speak about
weather conditions. I don't believe it is with a floating and
never-quite-identified "it" the way English does. You do, and you
don't think the "it" is unidentified. We disagree. I can live with
it.