tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 01 21:06:39 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: states, activities
- From: "Stauffer, Tad E (STAUFTE7)" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: states, activities
- Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 00:06:29 -0400
jatlh Sustel:
> From: Stauffer, Tad E (STAUFTE7) <[email protected]>
>
> > I had a thought about how this use of imperative stative verbs might
> >be explained.. In the case of {..yIyoH}, the state can be changed by the
> >person spoken to, without any actual physical act. With {petaD} (when
> >taken literally), however, a physical process is required. When ordered,
> >you can't simply try to become frozen.. you have to do something to
> >cause yourself to be frozen, such as jump in a barrel of liquid
> >nitrogen. Similarly, I don't think that {yIHegh} could be used properly
> >as a command under normal circumstances, since you can't just die at
> >will. You would have to do something physical to change to that
> >condition.
>
> That's a very compelling thought, Tad, especially since the other example
> Okrand uses is with {tuj}, and becoming hot cannot be done without a
> physical process.
>
> > So if someone said {yIyoH} (as SuStel quoted above), you can
> >presumably become brave just by willing yourself.
>
> Another way of looking at it is that some words, such as {yoH}, can be
> *either* stative or active, depending on the current concept being used.
> In
> the case of {wej tlhInganpu' yoH} (CK), the {yoH} is definitely describing
> a
> state: the Klingons are not BEING brave actively, they simply ARE brave,
> as
> a state.
>
> Then, as you point out, "being frozen" is something which you cannot do
> actively, you can only attain that state. Therefore, anytime someone
> commands you to "be frozen," it can only be viewed as the idiomatic usage.
>
<vIchIp>
> SuStel
> Stardate 98332.0
>
Hmmm... I wonder if you could give the command {yIjor}. At first glance,
{jor} seems to me that it would be an active word. However, like {yItuj} or
{yIHegh}, it isn't something that one can spontaneously do at will, and
would require an active process (at least as far as people are concerned,
giving the command to a starship with a self-destruct feature would be a
different matter). It makes more sense to me, then, to give the command
{yIjor'eghmoH}, i.e. "Make yourself explode!", rather than "Explode!"
If {yIjor'eghmoH} is preferable, then could {jor} be considered to be both
stative and active, in different contexts, like you suggested above with
"adjectives" like {yoH}? Would I be able to say {DujwIj Do'Ha' Qaw' Hov jor}
(My unlucky ship was destroyed by the exploding star), or would I have to
say {Duj Qaw' jorbogh Hov}? This idea, however, seems to be discouraged by
the proverb from the addendum of TKD: {qaStaHvIS wa' ram loSSaD Hugh SIjlaH
qetbogh loD}, where Okrand used {qetbogh loD} instead of {loD qet}.
Tad Stauffer
[email protected]