tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 17 12:38:30 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: plans
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: plans
- Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 14:30:44 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, November 17, 1997 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: plans
>just out of curiosity: does
>
>"I don't know that the child didn't eat the chocolate."
>
>also mean
>
>"I don't know whether the child ate the chocolate."
Yes, I would say it does. The meaning is exactly the same. The first
sentence does not automatically indicate that "the child didn't eat the
chocolate" is true. It's setting up a possible true statement, and then
saying that you don't know the possibly true "fact."
>(it just occurred to me that maybe the difference is in the scope
>of the "not" in the main clause; am I right that you think of it
>as negating "I know that the child ate the chocolate."? It looks
>like I see it as negating only "know", if that makes sense to you...)
No, it negates "know."
(The child ate the chocolate.) That's what I do not know.
Stated this way, in English, the meaning, or connotation, is not the same.
When it's said as two independent statements, it means what you say it
means.
"whether": conj. (1) a word introducing, in dependent clauses or the like,
the first of two or more alternatives, and sometimes repeated before the
second or later alternative (used in correlation with "or"): "it matters
little whether we go or stay"; "whether we go or whether we stay, the result
is the same." (2) used to introduce a single alternative (the other being
implied or understood), and hence some clause or element not involving
alternatives: "see whether he has come (or not)," "I doubt whether we can do
any better." [...]
"if": conj. (1) in case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that.
(2) even though. (3) whether. [...]
"I do not know whether/if the child ate the chocolate."
"The child ate the chocolate" is a single alternative, the other being
implied or understood.
Klingon, on the other hand, does not have a "whether" suffix, or any other
construction which explicitly does this job.
One might say that in {yuch Sop puq 'e' vISovbe'} it is the validity of the
first sentence that I do not know, and not the sentence itself, but I don't
think that's quite right. I'm stating that I don't kinow the first of two
alternatives. If I don't konw the first one, I obviously don't know the
second one.
>> Also consider the following, posted by Marc Okrand. Note especially his
>> translation of the sentence with {SIv}.
>>
>as English does it one way and German an other, I'd rather wait for
>canon with {... 'e' vISovbe'} before I use it; I don't think you can
>infer anything from how {SIv} - or any other verb - behaves for
>determining the behaviour of {Sov} (or, at least, you can infer only
>little)
In this case, I disagree. {SIv} means {Sovbe' 'ej qeltaH} not knowing and
thinking about whatever the object {'e'} is. And since Okrand discussed
both of these verbs together, addressing exactly this function of {SIv}, it
makes sense to me.
Hmmm . . . how ELSE might you say "I don't know whether the child ate the
chocolate"? Without trying to use a question as object that is. And
preferrably without using rhetorical questions, too.
SuStel
Stardate 97880.4