tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 03 20:42:49 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jajlo'
ja'pu' charghwI':
> If you quote, you quote. If you don't quote, you just
> state. You don't talk about quoting. That's the kind of vague,
> wittering jibberish that makes Klingons reach for their blades.
ja' QetlhIS:
>What other possibility would you then propose, if you're talking
>about the content of a story, if you deny all words which have to
>do with reporting that the direct object cannot be anything else
>than a quote, without quoting the whole story?
You can "consider" things -- {qel} is a fine word. You can "describe"
situations. You can "remember" and "remind" and "display." The only
"denial" here is that {ja'} doesn't seem to take objects other than
the person being spoken to. Quotes aren't objects; they're separate
sentences.
>IMHO (as little as it counts), if i can speak "Hol", I should also
>be able to place a different object there, which is as equally an
>abstraction of the quoted (just more specific), as is "Hol" an
>abstraction of anything quoted.
That's pushing it a bit, I think. {jatlh} appears to have the meaning
"speak (a language)" as well as an intransitive "speak [use voice]".
We've never seen it take anything other than a language as its object;
any time its used as a verb of saying, the person addressed has been
identified with {-vaD}.
-- ghunchu'wI'