tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 17 08:28:25 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Quotable quotes



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:09:38 -0800
>From: Ivan A Derzhanski <[email protected]>
>
>Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>> >From: Ivan A Derzhanski <[email protected]>
>> >David Trimboli wrote:
>
>> I note you changed from "sometimes" to "often," 'Iwvan.  Been deceived
>> a few times too many, eh? :)
>
>The author of the aphorism must have been, as he made a general statement.
>If appearances are said to be generally deceptive, does that mean that
>they deceive sometimes, often or always?  I chose the middle point.

I failed to look at the original line, but only saw the proposal with "rut"
and your change to "pIj".  My fault.

>> >HurghwI' wrote:
>> >> jatlh 'Iwvan:
>> >> >`Honour is not all; it is merely a thing.'
>> >>
>> >> That would be <...Doch 'oH neH>.
>> >
>> >Hardly.  That would mean `only it is a thing', `it alone is a thing'.
>> 
>> No, THAT would mean "it is merely a thing."  The pronoun "'oH" in this
>> sentence is functioning as the verb, so neH after it is triviallizing
>> that action of "being" a thing.
>
>Then you should say `It merely is a thing', shouldn't you?  DIvI' Hol
>jatlhlu'DI', wot'e' choHbogh 'oH nung _merely_, qar'a'?

I think the main problem here is that there is abiguity in the Klingon
"neH", with its two meanings, and also in the English, where "merely" has
many of the same problems as "only".  Even if you put "merely" after the
"is" in the English, it remains an adverb, and so I hear "it is merely a
thing" as a trivialization, not a restriction ("only" in the snese of only
it and nothing else).  It doesn't help matters any that we're talking about
modifying a copula, whose meaning is so bland and amounts to almost
verbalizing a noun (in a language which I'm inventing, the the copula is
actually formed by a special suffix on the noun, making a verb meaning "to
be an X"), so that modifying it and modifying the noun are pretty much the
same thing.

>> >> "Unlike other adverbials, <neH> can follow a noun. In such cases
>> >> it means only, alone." TKD 56
>> >
>> >Exactly.  Let's see how it works.  {Doch} `a/the thing'.  {Doch neH}
>> >`only a/the thing', `a/the thing alone'.  {Doch neH 'oH} `it is only
>> >a/the thing (and nothing else)'.  nap, qar'a'?
>> 
>> Ooog.  This is something I had not considered.  I see where you're
>> coming from.
>
>I'm coming from the fact that _only the officer_ (used by MO to gloss
>{yaS neH} in the passage where he explains what he means when he says
>that postnominal {neH} means `only', on the page which you advised me
>to check, without bothering to follow that advice yourself) isn't the
>same thing as _the only officer_.  The former means `the officer (but
>not the sergeant, the private or the general's pet targ)', the latter
>means `the officer (of whom there is exactly one)'.

Exactly.  If you read what I wrote, you'll see I followed your logic much
the same way:

>> If "yaS neH vIlegh" means "I see only the officer," then "Doch neH
>> 'oH" would logically mean "only it is a thing."

See?  Same example even (since we both went back to the text)

>> Ah, but would it?  THAT really would have to be "Doch 'oH 'oH'e' neH"!
>
>Somehow I doubt that.  We're used to thinking of {-'e'} as a mere
>element of the equational construction, but _tKD_ p.68 implies that
>here it does act as a topic marker.  {Doch 'oH quv'e'} literally
>means `As for honour, it is a/the thing'.  How can we paraphrase
>`Only honour is a thing'?  My best guess is `As for honour, only
>it is a thing', {Doch 'oH neH quv'e'}.

Which runs again into the problem of sounding like you're trivializing the
action of the verb-like copula pronoun 'oH.  Trouble is that "'oH" is a
pronoun, and so partakes of both the noun and verb nature.  It is probably
overly rigid to say that when it's acting as a verb (as here) it is purely
a verb and thus neH takes its trivializing meaning, and never its
restricting meaning.  This whole case is complicated from many angles, not
the least of which the fact that we're dealing with the copula, which is
only a sortakinda verb.

>> (or possibly 'oH neH 'oH Doch'e').  A big part of the problem is the
>> double-use of 'oH as pronoun and copula.  in "Doch 'oH"/"it is a/the
>> thing," Doch is plainly a noun [...], and thus 'oH must be functioning
>> as a predicate (thus verbally).  I suppose if you're being very picky,
>> "Doch neH 'oH" would come out to "it is a/the thing alone" (not merely!).
>
>What's the difference?  You have a restrictive modifier applying to the
>complement of the copula, `[it [is [only [a/the thing]]]]'.  A different
>placement of {neH} could get you `[it [[only is] [a/the thing]]]' (what
>MO calls trivialising the verb) or `[[only it] [is [a/the thing]]]'.

I don't see much difference between [it [is [only [a/the thing]]]] and [it
[[only is] [a/the thing]]], as I said before about how modifying the
copula and modifying the complement come out about the same.  However, if
you do take the view that when 'oH is a copula it acts only as a verb, you
can't really [it [is [only [a/the thing]]]], since that is basically
applying a trivializing concept to a noun, which we don't have in Klingon.

>> Personally, I think "Doch neH 'oH" does sort of work for this, [...]
>
>Mark, please translate `the only thing' and `only the thing' into Hebrew,
>or any other Terran language for that matter, and tell me if they are as
>similar as they happen to be in English.

Ow.  Good point:

Hebrew: "the only thing"/"ha-davar ha-yachid" (yachid < root for "one,
unity").  "only a thing"/"raq davar"  "only the thing"/"raq ha-davar"

Welsh: "the only thing"/"yr unig beth" ("unig" < "un"/"one").  "only the
thing"/"dim ond y peth" (lit. "nothing but the thing.") (digression: "unig"
is a fun adjective in Welsh: placed before the noun, it means "only", and
after the noun it means "lonely".  hence the Welsh proverb "Mae unig
blentyn yn blentyn unig": "an only child is a lonely child."  Also note
that "unig" is pronounced "eenig", with the first syullable rhyming with
"see", at least in South Wales).

~mark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMt+oe8ppGeTJXWZ9AQHlQQMApz9c8k9MhKP9OwXv+yeOIQUR4Rt3ssac
hEJulBsZp5GbCjOrlJdlPhaYsrfwkq9lTqKOZDxzjTTKEXp/Hqr/XHgApgqD2Yms
8Zm30ctd2EOukJSLtHgxjFFQZGLHq1qw
=dwkQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Back to archive top level