tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 28 07:45:46 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC Clipped vs not



I said
> > I don't think pronouns are ever "clipped"; they can be left out
> > if they are not functioning as verbs, but that is not clipping.
> 
SuStel replied
> Quite correct.
> 
> > It doesn't make sense to use imperative with pronouns-as-verbs,
> > so where is the evidence for clipping of pronouns?
> 
> Well, clipping doesn't only happen when giving commands.  For example (from 
> canon, I believe), {So'wI' chu'ta'} "cloaking device engaged."
> 
here, I was referring to the clipping of _verbs_ as opposed
to affixes, which TKD only mentions for commands


> > would you accept {Ha'DIbaH targh'e'} as clipped Klingon?
> 
> If it were simply {Ha'DIbaH targh}, I might.  No, I don't think we've ever 
> seen this sort of clipping in canon, but I don't consider it much of a 
> stretch.
> 
so you're saying that if I clip the verbal pronoun I should clip
the <<subject-marking -'e'>> as well? why's that?

> Okay, I'm not trying to say "clipping *is* this," or "clipping *is* that."  
> I'm just trying to come up with some ideas of exactly how to explain it 
> without quoting all of the TKD section on it.
> 
don't misunderstand me, please! I'm not trying to have you defend
yourself! It just caught my curiosity that you considered clipping
of pronouns and I want to understand.

HomDoq



Back to archive top level