tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 16 14:04:51 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: RE: KLBC:convert

On Mon, 15 Feb 1999 15:39:35 -0800 (PST) Steven Boozer 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> 'oghwI':
> > lab 'oghwI' bIlI'
> > Transmitted from 'oghwI' to you.
> 
> pagh: 
> : This sentence has two verbs, so it needs to be two sentences: 
> : 	<lab 'oghwI'. bIlI'.>. 
> 
> Using just one verb as you did in English, you could say:
> 
> 	'oghwI'vo' SoHvaD lablu'.
> 	(It [the data] was) transmitted from 'oghwI' to you.
> 
> But that's a little impersonal and clumsy.  Why not say in a straightforward Klingon manner:  
> 
> 	Dulab 'oghwI'.
> 	'oghwI' transmitted it (the data) to you.

I think it is good to at least mention the most "proper" way to 
express this:

SoHvaD De' lab 'oghwI'.

'oghwI' sends the information to you.

> Since you cannot {lab} people - we have two special verbs for 
> that {jol} & {Qol} "beam, transport" - only data, "you" 
> becomes the indirect object of {lab} "transmit data (away from 
> a place)".  This is an application of the usage Okrand 
> explained on the Expert Forum (6/97):
 
> 	Since the object of {jatlh} is that which is spoken, and since 
> 	"you" or "I" or "we" cannot be spoken (and therefore cannot be 
> 	the object of the verb), if the verb is used with a pronominal 
> 	prefix indicating a first- or second-person object, that first 
> 	or second person is the indirect object. Which is a not very 
> 	elegant way of saying that {qajatlh} means "I speak to you or, 
> 	more literally, perhaps "I speak it to you", where "it" is a 
> 	language or a speech or whatever."
> 
> : 		   <lab> and <lI'> also win the "most confusing definition" award, so
> : I'm not sure of this usage. I think it's correct, but others may have other
> : ideas.

>From examining the use in ST3 (the only canon examples I know 
of), I realized that the definition works if you think about the 
place as being where you are when you are doing it. To transmit 
data (from a place) is to send the data. To transmit data (to a 
place), if the place is where you are, is to receive data.

Add that {lab} becomes a pun. I'll lob you the message. That's 
the trick I use to recognize the difference.
 
> If it turns out that we really want to use {lI'} "transmit 
> data (to a place)" - I'm not quite sure which to use either - 
> the trick works for that verb too.

Remember Okrand's focus on deixis. The assumed context is the 
place where the action is happening. So, "to a place" is to 
receive and "from a place" is to send. Without this concept of 
deixis, it is confusing because all transmissions involve both 
going from a place (the source) to a place (the target). With 
deixis, you are revealing whether you are the source or the 
target. It is like {Hop} and {Sum} in this regard, except that 
{lab} and {lI'} are transitive. But like {Hop} and {Sum} there 
is an assumption as to where the action is taking place. What is 
your reference point when you participate in the transmission?

> -- 
> Voragh                       
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level