tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 25 08:35:00 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: KLBC: -vaD

On Wed, 24 Dec 1997 13:06:18 -0800 (PST) Steven Boozer 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> : From: [email protected] (Scott D. Randel):
> : >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?
> : 
> : Oooh!  Intriguing.  Something about that sounds somewhat nice to me.  But I
> : don't think I want to go there...
> : 
> : ~mark
> 
>   "This suffix indicates that the noun to which it is attached is in some
> way the 
>   beneficiary of the action, the person or thing for whom or for which the
> activity
>   occurs. {Qu'vaD lI' De'vam} `This information is useful for the mission.'
> The noun
>   {Qu'vaD} means `for the mission', and in this sentence {-vaD} indicates
> that the
>   information is intended to be used somehow for the mission under
> discussion." (TKD:28f)
> 
> Hmm... "in some way the beneficiary..." Nicely ambiguous. I think Scott's on
> to something. Marking the indirect object is just one of its uses:

[More TKD quotes snipped.]

> Certainly {-vaD} is primarily used on this list to mean "to", we need to
> remember that it does have other, perhaps more poetic, uses. What "I speak
> for the trees" means isn't obvious in English either. After all, loggers
> speak "for the trees" too, they just have a different constituency.
> 
> Voragh

Well, in this case, I stated that I had looked up MSN canon for 
one of the few times Okrand has answered questions there, but 
apparently paraphrasing isn't enough, so:

****************************************************************
On MSN:
> 1) Does qajatlh mean anything? Some feel this is poor grammar. 
> I'm not sure what to think. Can jatlh take an object other 
> than a language?

The object of  jatlh "speak" is that which is spoken.  Thus, 
it's OK to say "speak a language," for example:

	tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh "you speak Klingon"
	(tlhIngan Hol "Klingon language," Dajatlh "you speak it")

But it's also OK to say "speak an address, speak a lecture," for 
example:

	SoQ Dajatlh "you speak an address" or, more 
	colloquially, "you deliver an address" or "you make a 
	speech" (SoQ "speech, lecture, address," Dajatlh "you 
	speak it")

To say simply:

	jatlh "he/she speaks"

implies "he/she speaks it," where "it" is a language or a 
lecture or whatever.

The indirect object of jatlh, when expressed, is the 
hearer/listener. Thus:

	qama'pu'vaD tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh "you speak Klingon to the prisoners"
	(qama'pu'vaD "for the prisoners," tlhIngan Hol "Klingon language," Dajatlh
	"you speak it")

	qama'pu'vaD SoQ Dajatlh "you make a speech to the prisoners"
	(qama'pu'vaD "for the prisoners," SoQ "speech, lecture, address," Dajatlh "you speak it")

When the indirect object (in this case, the hearer) is first or 
second person, the pronominal prefix which normally indicates 
first or second person object may be used.  There are other 
examples of this sort of thing with other verbs.  For example, 
someone undergoing the Rite of Ascension says:

	tIqwIj Sa'angnIS "I must show you [plural] my heart"
	(tIqwIj "my heart," Sa'angnIS "I must show you [plural] it")

The pronominal prefix in this phrase is Sa-, which means "I [do 
something to] all of you" in such sentences as:

	Salegh "I see you [plural]"

but when there's already an object (in this case, tIqwIj "my 
heart"), the "object" of the prefix is interpreted as the 
indirect object, so Sa- means "I [do something to] it for you" 
or the like.

This, then, brings us back to your question.  Since the object 
of jatlh is that which is spoken, and since "you" or "I" or "we" 
cannot be spoken (and therefore cannot be the object of the 
verb), if the verb is used with a pronominal prefix indicating a 
first- or second-person object, that first or second person is 
the indirect object.

Which is a not very elegant way of saying that qajatlh means "I 
speak to you" or, more literally, perhaps "I speak it to you," 
where "it" is a language or a speech or whatever:

	qajatlh "I speak to you"

	Sajatlh "I speak to you [plural]"

	chojatlh "you speak to me"

	tlhIngan Hol qajatlh "I speak Klingon to you"
	(tlhIngan Hol "Klingon language," qajatlh "I speak it to you")

There's another wrinkle to this.  The verb jatlh can also be 
used when giving direct quotations:

	tlhIngan jIH jatlh "he/she says, 'I am a Klingon'"
	(tlhIngan "Klingon," jIH "I," jatlh "speak")

	jatlh tlhIngan jIH "he/she says, 'I am a Klingon'"

(With verbs of saying, such as jatlh, the phrase that is being 
said or cited may come before or after the verb.)

If the speaker is first or second person, the pronominal prefix 
indicating "no object" is used:

	tlhIngan jIH jIjatlh "I say, 'I am a Klingon'"
	(jIjatlh "I speak")

	tlhIngan jIH bIjatlh "you say, 'I am a Klingon'"
	(bIjatlh "you speak")

There are instances where the pronominal prefix marks a big 
distinction in meaning:

	tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh "you speak Klingon" (tlhIngan Hol 
	"Klingon language," Dajatlh "you speak it")

	tlhIngan Hol bIjatlh "you say, 'Klingon language'" [that 
	is "you say the phrase 'Klingon language'"] (tlhIngan 
	Hol "Klingon language," bIjatlh "you speak")

**************************************************************

So, for the verb jatlh, unless you want to really go where no 
Klingon speaker has gone before... you should use {-vaD} for the 
person addressed, not for the person you are representing. 

charghwI', ru' taghwI' pabpo'
Temporary Beginner's Grammarian, December 20-30

Back to archive top level