tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 18 12:42:31 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: qa'vIn

On Sat, 16 Jan 1999 20:56:49 -0800 (PST) David Trimboli 
<> wrote:

> On the other hand, in {bIjatlhnIS He'So' je mu'tlheghvam 'e' vIHar}, the
> first sentence is {bIjatlhnIS He'So' je mu'tlheghvam} and the second
> sentence is {'e' vIHar}.  It does follow the rules as we know them.

It is rather ugly, though. For one thing, it clearly comes from 
an English translation, since a Klingon would not bother with 
saying {'e' vIHar} when he has {-law'}, {-bej} and {-chu'} at 
his disposal.
> Of course, I think this is very poor style for quotations.  In my opinion,
> the quotation should not come between two other parts of a Sentence As
> Object construction.  This is not a rule, this is common sense.

In this case, I agree. Is it that you believe that {bIjatlhnIS} 
or is it that you believe that {He'So' je mu'tlheghvam}? Since 
the word order is reverseable here, it makes sense to put the 
most applicable one directly before the {'e'}.
> I am one of those people who tends to put the {jatlh} sentence first, and
> the quotation second.  I do this because frequently the quotations are
> multiple sentences in length, and this keeps them distinct from
> non-quotations.  (Unless we see evidence that quotations are never more than
> one sentence in length, I'll continue to use multiple sentence quotations.)

I tend to do the same for three reasons. One is as you state. 
Two is because it sets the listener/reader's understanding of 
the grammatical function of what follows. One is because it more 
clearly establishes that the quotation is not itself the object 
of the verb of speech.
> Now, why hasn't anyone mentioned that {He'So'} is being used here as an
> English metaphor . . . ?

It obviously and intentionally was. I'll fess up. I did it.
> SuStel
> Stardate 99044.6
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Anderson <>
> To: Multiple recipients of list <>
> Date: Saturday, January 16, 1999 2:29 AM
> Subject: Re: qa'vIn
> >>Furthermore, although it is
> >>not necessary to put <jatlh> before the quote, I have seen it often in
> canon.
> >>This gives:  bIjatlhnIS <He'So' je mu'tlheghvam> 'e' vIHar.
> >
> >This is probably *not* okay.  You've tossed the quotation in the middle of
> >a sentence as object structure, where it definitely gets in the way.  You
> >*might* be able to say {bIjatlhnIS 'e' vIHar: <He'So' je mu'tlheghvam} --
> >but I wouldn't put money on it.

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level