tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 21 07:42:43 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: -vaD
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: -vaD
- Date: Sun, 21 Dec 1997 10:42:14 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- Priority: NORMAL
On Sat, 20 Dec 1997 22:30:03 -0800 (PST) "Scott D. Randel"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Can the N-5 suffix -vaD ("for, intended for") be used to mean "on
> behalf of," as the English "for" can? As an example, Dr. Seuss's
> Lorax would say "I speak for the trees." Would {SormeyvaD vIjatlh}
> mean the same thing?
>
> ---------------
> Scott D. Randel
> tera'ngan thlIngan Hol ghojwI'
According to Okrand in response to a question about {jatlh}, he
said that {jatlh} is used two ways. Use it as a transitive verb
when one is "speaking" a language, a speech or an address.
{tlhIngan Hol vIjatlh}. "I speak Klingon."
It can also be used in direct quotation. {jIjatlh yI'Ij!} "I
said, 'Listen!' Note that I also could have said, {yI'Ij
jIjatlh.} In both cases, the intransitive prefix is used.
He explains that the indirect object is the person spoken to.
{SormeyvaD vIjatlh} would mean "I said it to the trees." The
"it" would have to be a language, a speech or an address or such.
For your meaning, you'd want to consider recasting it a bit.
When you speak for the trees, you do so for a purpose, right?
The purpose is to represent the trees. So, how would you say,
"For the purpose of representing the trees, I spoke."? You might
also think of it as, "In order that I represent the trees, I
spoke."
Remember that "spoke" is just past tense, not perfective (which
would be "have spoken"). So, make a stab at it. Tell me how you
would translate it now.
charghwI', ru' taghwI' pabpo'
Temporary Beginner's Grammarian, December 20-30