tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 19 09:56:22 2000

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Deixis and direction




> > > >HewDaq jIlegh.
> > > >I look at the statue.
> 

jatlh charghwI':
> 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.
> 
> I'd think she was some alien doing a piss poor job of speaking Klingon. That
> obviously should be {Hew yIlegh! vIHtaH!}
> 
> charghwI'
> 
alright, I'm going to backoff a little (mainly because I'll take a vacation
soon :) and agree that {legh} probably isn't the right verb to chose here.

however, I believe, that if you use it in imperative mode, as in {yIlegh},
you are essentially using it with the "look" meaning, too.

IMO, one cannot be ordered to "see" something one doesn't see.
Any command to have a sensation is semantically void.

In English you "should" say "Look at the statue!", "Look at Spot runnning!"
That "See!" can double up for this meaning is essentially a result of its
not making sense otherwise.

"See Spot run!" works, but "He sees Spot run." doesn't mean the
same as "He looks at Spot running." at all.

That said, I repeat that probably {Hew yIbej!} is the right way to
say "Look at the statue!", or is it?

                                           Marc Ruehlaender
                                           aka HomDoq
                                           [email protected]


Back to archive top level