tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 17 22:09:26 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: poH qelDI' tlhIngan Hol mu'tlheghmey
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: poH qelDI' tlhIngan Hol mu'tlheghmey
- Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 16:12:34 -0500
From: WestphalWz <[email protected]>
>In a message dated 98-03-13 12:54:48 EST, SuStel writes:
>
><< "He got off the jitney, AND THEN he bought some
> food." >>
>
>Actually, when I was studying English, I learned that "and then" is
incorrect
>English!
Is that so? Well then, you'll certainly understand the following
progression:
"He got off the jitney" is a correct English sentence.
"Then he bought some food" is a correct English sentence.
"And" is used to join two (or more) sentences (and indicates that both are
true or, in the case of imperatives, that both must be carried out).
Therefore, "[He got off the jitney] and [then he bought some food]" OUGHT to
be a correct English sentence.
If you are correct, and it is not, then there is some kind of restriction
here, whether arbitrary (thou shalt not split thy infinitives) or stylistic
(thou shalt not start a sentence with "because").
Well then, surely you can see the possiblitiy that there may be a stylistic
restriction on {'ej} in Klingon. You'd have maintained that {lupwI' tIjHa'}
is a correct Klingon sentence, and {Soj je'} is a correct Klingon sentence,
and therefore (is that allowed?) {lupwI' tIjHa' 'ej Soj je'} is a correct
Klingon sentence. I agree that it is grammatically correct, but it does not
necessarily mean what you want. Stylistically, a sequence in Klingon
typically wants a new sentence: {lupwI' tIjHa'. Soj je'.} or a subordiante
clause: {lupwI' tIjHa'DI' Soj je'}. As I've said, this is not an
all-or-nothing rule of Klingon, it's what I've observed as the predominant
style and meaning of certain constructions. A Klingon would understand you
if you violated it, but your speech may be marked if you keep it up.
SuStel
Stardate 98209.1