tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 19 23:51:14 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Raise your betleH to the stars.....
----- Original Message -----
From: William Martin <[email protected]>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TPO [mailto:[email protected]]
> ...
> > You keep using ghoS. Sure, with ghoS, lurgh doesn't do very much.
>
> Well, at least we are getting SOMEwhere. Now, you are saying that your
> intended use of {lurgh} doesn't work with {ghoS}. This is a new statement.
I
> can work with that.
>
> > >Meanwhile, to get back to the original question, I do not believe that
> > >"raise"/pep is a verb that behaves like {ghoS}. I do not believe
> > that it can
> > >have a target as its direct object. The direct object is the thing one
is
> > >raising. So, if you use a locative with that verb, then the
> > locative is not
> > >a direct object. It is just a locative. As such, it tells you
> > the location
> > >where the action of the verb occurs.
> > >
> > >Add to it that the verb already implies deixis, since you can't raise
> > >something unless you have a gravitational field to oppose or something
we
> > >can agree on as a floor or ground or equivalent to move the object away
> > >from. pep = bIngvo' DungDaq vay' vIHmoHlu'. Talking about direction is
> > >uncharacteristically redundant with this verb. I suspect that
> > the original
> > >poster of this question chooses to add "toward the stars" to
> > imply distance
> > >and enthusiasm and not direction. "Raise your betleHmey REALLY, REALLY
> > >HIGH!" For that, {pepchu'} would be better than getting all tangled up
in
> > >{Hovmey lurghDaq}.
> >
> > I agree that to lift something there is also gravity to imply which way
is
> > up. But you don't have to lift something straight up. You can lift
> > something and be holding it out to your side.
>
> Meanwhile, I doubt that would be called {pepchu'}.
>
> > DungDaq betleH pep - the betleH is raised in the area above the subject.
>
> You've made an interesting assumption. By my perspective, you have not
> revealed which potential {Dung} you are talking about. The subject? The
> speaker? The listener? It isn't clear. There isn't really a global {Dung},
> since no matter how high you go, something else can be higher.
>
> > retlhDaq betleH pep - the betleH is raised in the area next to
> > the subject.
>
> Again, you make an assumption with little to justify it.
>
> > tlhopDaq betleH pep - the betleH is raised in the area in front
> > of the subject.
>
> Why the subject?
>
>
> > Hov lurghDaq betleH pep - lurgh is an area of space just like Dung and
> > tlhop. Dung is always above, tlhop is always in front; lurgh is that
area
> > that is located in relation to the n1.
lurgh is not an area of space like Dung or tlhop but actually a "spatial
direction" which is why I concidered it in the first place to try and imply
the "action was taking place in a spatial direction"
>
> I'd feel better about this is we had any canon examples of its use.
There's
> an assumption here that is yelling so loudly that it begs for reply lest
it
> go uncontested. We don't quite know how {lurgh} is to be used.
I accept that but does that mean we can't use it. after all it I write
something and we then get given contrary examples it just means I or whoever
takes a chance with any vague usage has to eat humble pie. Again if we
haven't got examples and a usage could be understood does it matter for now.
Isn't it possible to say, "well we just don't know but that'll do for now"
(I'm not saying that this applies in this case, I haven't got the experience
for that but there are those who have)
>
> > Now in reference to stars I can see your arguement. The stars are
> > everywhere, and your really saying lift it high; so yes, pepchu' would
be
> > good for this.
>
So how does a Klingon Salute the Stars then? If it's not possible to say,
"in that direction".
> And what about the whole way I put it. I actually thought it worked pretty
> well:
Whether it works or not, it is so un-poetic. I know ta' Hol can be very
removed from any English translation. But forget my English try thinking
about how a Klingon might say it or even think it and go from there. I
initially tried just describing the action I wanted to communicate it
"I raise my Batleh". In what way do I do this?
"I raise it towards the Stars" just as I might salute the stars.
Thats how I got the first part of my sentence.
wo things are very important here
1) The action - the Raising (although that could always be something like
thrusting)
2) The direction - I am doing it in a particular. Poetically the Stars as
that has significant meaning to Klingons.
>
> betlhlIj yIpep! Hovmey yIqaD!
I like that in it's own right but it is not what I am doing.
taking a complete turn here as I re-read pge 83 ' TKW' how about breaking my
phrase down to
1) Raise your BatleH
2) and Salute the Stars
3) then proclaim, "victory for all whom have honour"
Or would 2 imply that I've just stuck the BatleH in my chest. Thinking
about the Klingon salute and the way you might hold a BatleH and do a salute
maybe you could just say:
"Holding your BatleH Salute the Stars and (then) proclaim victory for all
whom have honour"
[betlheHlIj 'ej Hovmey tIvan vaj yay yImaq HochvaD quv lughajbogh]
This maybe gets around the problem of lurgh or even makes it non essential
in this case but lurgh is still what could be a verry useful word.
> > DungDaq taj yI'uch - hold the knife above.
>
> Above what? I would tend to assume you mean "Above you and me" assuming
that
> we are on similar levels.
Again these are just talking about "area ...." that wasn't what I was
saying.
>
> > tlhopDaq taj yI'uch - hold the knife in front.
>
> In front of you, or in front of me? Are we facing the same direction?
>
> > Sor lurghDaq taj yI'uch - hold the knife towards the tree.
>
> The problem I have here is that the verb {'uch} does not imply any kind of
> target. Given that, the action is supposed to happen in a place. So, what
> place really is the direction of the tree? How far toward the tree am I
> supposed to walk, holding this knife? And is the tree's direction to be
> measured from me or from you? I honestly think you'd be better served with
a
> verb that implies a target. {Sor lurghvaD tajlIj yIQeq.}
I can see -vaD being used like that maybe you've got it.
>
> This gives you more expressive versitility.
I like the more I read it.
>
> chanlIjDaq Sor lurghvaD tajlIj yIQeq. The direction really is the indirect
> object here. The locative is "to your East".
Back to saluting the Stars - Hovmey Davan has no locative. If someting is
descriptive enough like stars you wouldn't even need anything to imply up or
wherever.
>
> Or {yotlhwIjDaq Sor lurghvaD tajlIj yIQeq.} Be in my field and point your
> knife in the tree's direction.
So "Point your knife towards the Stars" could be [Hovmey lurghvaD tajlIj
yIQeq] and
"Thrust your BatleH towards the Stars" could be [Hovmey lurghvaD betlheHlIj
yIjop]
>
> > DloraH
>
> charghwI'
>
qe'San