tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 01 16:29:47 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: Q on {-meH} (was: long weekend with MO)

At 13:54 98-06-01 -0700, Marc Ruelander wrote:
}
}ter'eS, Voragh and charghwI' discuss the following sentences
}(with respect of indefinite subject "it")
}
}yaS SuvmeH Qatlh (Qu').
}It (The task) is difficult to fight the officer.
}
}qIpmeH Qatlh'a' nejwI'?
}Is the probe difficult to hit?
}
}tlhIngan Hol jatlhmeH ngeD.
}It is easy to speak Klingon.
}
}Now, I've seen this before, and I never quite understood, how
}the being difficult/easy/whatever is done for a purpose.
}
}(*It is difficult in order to fight the officer.
}*It is difficult in order to hit.
}*It is easy in order to speak Klingon.)
}
}This is quite obviously not what is meant here.
}Can I please have a summary of how the meaning of {-meH}
}is extended by Okrandian usage?

This is partly a question for Voragh, who expertly maintains a database of
canon usage.  I'll provide a couple of examples that come to mind and
discuss them.

Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam - Today is a good day to die.
"For the purpose of one dying, this day is good."

This isn't a statement that the day has been created good in order that one
can die during it.  But when you consider using the day for the purpose of
dying, then it evaluates to good.  

qIpmeH Qatlh'a' - Is is difficult to hit?

As you pointed out, the probe isn't "difficult so he can hit it."  But for
the purpose of hitting the probe, it is easy. 

A point to notice is that without these examples we might have thought it
necesary to say {qIplu'meH Qatlh} or {vIqIpmeH Qatlh} "It's difficult for
one/me to hit."  But the subject seems to be droppable in this kind of
construction.

The following are not from canon, just examples to contrast different
meanings of {-meH}.  Often the best translation doesn't use "in order to" or
"for the purpose of" but just "to" or "for."

Maybe: qIpmeH ngeD 'ach Qaw'meH Qatlh

It's easy to hit but hard to destroy.

If I said "that route is easy" you might ask "for what?" i.e. for what purpose.

toSmeH ngeD - It's easy to climb
SammeH ngeD - It's easy to find
HubmeH ngeD - It's easy to defend

The verb with {-meH} gives the purpose, the what-for of the other verb.

The meaning you were expecting from {qIpmeH} can certainly exist:

qIpmeH Qam - I read this first as "S/he stood in order to hit it/him/her,"
but because of the dropping of the subject I mentioned above, you could read
it as "S/he stood in order to be hit, for the purpose of being hit."  You'd
disambiguate here with explicit pronouns and/or using {-lu'}.

Finally, 
yajmeH ngeD - "It's easy to understand" or "it's easy so it can be
understood." Not completely clear whether this merely states the difficulty
level or whether it's giving the reason for it.  The meanings are close
enough here that it doesn't matter.  

I hope this helps.  

Qov     [email protected]
Now on ICQ: 12235599

Back to archive top level