tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 19 09:43:24 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Must
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Must
- Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 11:43:17 CDT
ghunchu'wI' said:
> Lets pick another verb that doesn't have this problem in German and see
> how it fits the way you're thinking about this. How about {jIba'nIS}?
> I think "I must sit" and "I need a chair" are different in the same way
> as "I must eat" and "I need food" are. What do you think?
>
this is getting too off-topic, I think, so I'll send you a private answer.
generally, though, I agree.
saying "I need food" is a better translation than "I need to eat"
was not a good idea.
however, I would like to get back to the point I was trying to make
in the post that spawned this...
> Without further context, {jISopnIS} says the speaker must eat. There's
> a verb with a suffix that indicates the speaker has no choice about it.
> "I need food" doesn't imply the same lack of volition. The way I read
> it, {-nIS} simply does not get addressed fully by the "need something"
> translation. It's got to be "need to *do* something", just like {-qang}
> has to be "willing to *do* something".
>
but does {-nIS} (and other type 2s) say something about the speaker or not?
SuStel suggests that <verb>nIS should be treated similar to <verb>moH.
maybe -moH and other prefix-mangling suffixes are not so good examples.
-laH may be better... but there I have the same problem, with the type
6s as well; on the other hand I have no trouble seeing V-3 and V-7 this
way (like V-moH). hmmm, I guess I'm letting myself be influenced too much
by the meaning of the suffixes
HomDoq