tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 01 18:32:55 2000

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

RE: Deixis and direction



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Andeen [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 1:59 PM
> To: '[email protected]'
> Subject: RE: Deixis and direction
>
>
> jatlh ghot Sar:
> >>>> HewDaq jIlegh.
> >>>> I look at the statue.
> >
> > Yuck. Would you also say {jaghDaq jISuv.}? Or how about
> > {HIqDaq jItlhutlh.} You have added {-Daq} for no reason.
> > {Hew vIlegh} is what you wanted. The statue is the
> > simple direct object of "see". {legh} doesn't mean
> > "look". It means "see". There's a difference. Yes, you
> > might "look at" a statue, but you don't "see at" a
> > statue. You just see it.
> >
> >> if someone grabbed your arm, pointed and whispered excitedly
> >> {HewDaq yIlegh! vIHtaH!} what else do you think she meant but
> >> "towards the statue"?
> >
> > I'd think she was some alien doing a piss poor job of
> > speaking Klingon. That obviously should be {Hew yIlegh!
> > vIHtaH!}
>
> And I would think that *something on the statue* was moving. I'd
> look for a
> bird or something, and when I didn't see it, I'd ask <vIH nuq?>.

What I said clearly means, "See the statue! It moves!" To this, you would
ask, "What moves?" I find that very curious. It doesn't mean "Look toward
the statue!" It means, "See the statue." Why would I ask you to see the
statue in order to watch something else move?

> That's not
> being deliberately obtuse and snotty; that's just what I would
> expect it to
> mean.
>
> pagh


charghwI'



Back to archive top level