tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 06 08:54:21 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: Imperative prefixes
>Date: Thu, 05 Aug 99 22:41:56 EST
>Errors-To: [email protected]
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>
>X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
>X-Comment: TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsub tlhingan-hol" to [email protected]
>
>Nelson asked about "first person imperative" and ~mark responded with a very
>detailed explanation.
>
>jatlh ~mark:
>
>> Option 3: What I like and generally preferred by grammarians:
>> just say what you mean! "maja'chuq!": we will talk. "qama'
>> wIjon" we go catch the prisoner. Context will have to provide
>> the exhortative meaning, and it just about always does. I
>> suppose you could also try "maja'chuqnIS", but that's not quite
>> the same thing.
>
>> So, I know I said MUCH more than I should have. But that's my
>> answer: Just use the first person and have done with it.
>
>Don't forget about the nice little exclamation <Ha'>. It's defined as "let's
>go, come on", and it does not seem to be limited to physical motion. The way
>I usually express this sort of thing is to just say <Ha'> and then whatever
>the activity is.
Woops, yeah, I'd forgotten about "Ha'"; it really does do the trick of
making sure it sounds co-hortive.
So long as you're wishing for weird imperatives, note also the Klingon
lacks a "third-person imperative." That's for stuff like "let there be
light" and such. When I think about it, Hebrew really does this, at least
in "let there be light"; that verb-form is definitely third-person, and is
definitely not indicative. But for other verbs I think it would just use
(something identical to?) the future tense, like with firs-person stuff.
Esperanto as usual uses its imperative, even for things we'd think more of
as "-jaj"-like, like "they should be happy" or commands "let him enter".
Note also that we're playing a little fast and loose with the word
"imperative". By rights, it really only applies to commands, and those
have to be given to second-person recipients. If you're commanding
yourself, ("Come on, Mark, THINK!") at best you're addressing yourself as
if another person (apostrophe? Sorta). What we've been calling
"first-person imperative" in *plural* is exhortation, sort of a mix between
command and statement of intent for self: we should all go do this. I'm
half-ordering you to do it, and include me in the group as well." In
Esperanto, at least, you can use imperative on first-person singular too,
but it carries a different meaning. More like "I must go" and so on.
Third-person imperative somehow actually seems more important than
first-person; it's it's not a rtue imperative either, but it's closer.
"Let him come in" is an order to your attendants to show in the person
waiting, but it works equally well something like "let there be light"
(which in English of course is also a command to the universe in general)
as an effort to dictate or control the acions of another person, and that's
the essence of command (though the person in this case happens not to be
preesent).
In Klingon you could do with -jaj or -nIS in many cases (NOT
interchangeably!) or circumlocutions like Englisd does.
I'm rambling again; I always got into trouble being polyglot on the Klingon
list...
~mark