tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 12 22:08:29 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Deixis and direction
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Anderson [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2000 9:01 PM
> SuStel:
> >A locative is not a special grammatical feature of Klingon syntax.
>
> I would like to agree completely, but I can't do so without contradicting
> what TKD has to say about it. I prefer to consider that locatives are a
> strictly semantic feature, but they are (inconveniently) labeled as
> "Syntactic markers" by TKD, and they are explicitly explained as
> indicating
> the function of nouns in a sentence.
>
> charghwI':
> >A suffix is a syntactical feature. It indicates a grammatical function.
>
> Syntax considers the rules by which words and other structures
> are combined
> to form sentences. Grammar is a much more comprehensive term, including
> syntax, inflections, and word formation rules. Type 5 noun suffixes just
> barely manage to fit the category of syntax, but only because they appear
> under the heading of "Syntactic markers" in TKD. Without that label, they
> might as well be just another class of noun suffixes, merely affecting the
> meaning of the noun instead of placing them in predefined roles in the
> sentence. The label carries lots of importance, but the actual usage of
> the suffixes does permit a simpler interpretation which does not involve
> syntax.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
I want to stop arguing this, especially in big messages that likely bore
most people.
Meanwhile, this is so fundamental to the functional structure of the
language.
In order to understand this better, I'll try to consider other suffix types.
Type 1 noun suffixes definitely affects the meaning and only the meaning of
the noun. It makes no difference to the syntax of the sentence whatsoever
because it does not alter the relationship between the noun and its verb.
Type 2 noun suffixes relates to grammar only by affecting the specific verb
prefix used to agree with the noun when it is used as subject or object of
the verb. Still, it does not change the syntax of the sentence. It does not
affect the grammar. The reason the noun is a legal part of the sentence does
not change.
Type 3 noun suffixes alters the meaning of the noun, but not the syntax or
grammar of the sentence using the noun, regardless of the grammatical link
between the noun and the verb.
Type 4 noun suffixes specify which instance of noun is being used. It is the
difference between a sister and MY sister. So it may alter the reference of
the noun, but it does not change the functional link between the noun and
the verb that is the core of the sentence.
Type 5 noun suffixes are different. They establish the nature of the
syntactic link between the noun and the verb. Nouns have no function in a
Klingon sentence except for their relationship to a given verb. It can fit
into a sentence if it is the subject (following the verb) or object
(preceeding the verb) or locative (preceeding the object and having {-Daq}
or being one of a very small number of nouns that imply {-Daq}) or causation
(preceeding the object and having {-mo'} or being the indirect object or
beneficiary (preceeding the object and having {-vaD} or it can have the
prepositional "from" link to the verb (preceeding the object and having
{-vo'} or it can state the topic of the sentence {preceeding the verb and
using {-'e'} or it can be a timestamp by being one of a special class of
time related nouns... or it can't really relate to the verb, so it can't
syntactically participate in a sentence. It then is just a word jammed into
a sentence with no syntax to justify it.
That's the best explanation I can give. I apologize for lacking the
resources to be more convincing than this.
charghwI'