tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 22 19:29:36 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: {-meH}
- From: Eric Andeen <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: {-meH}
- Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2000 19:29:02 -0700
Joseph:
> Reading HolQed 7.2 (how do I say "vol.7 issue 2" in Klingon?)" I
> realized that my concept of {-meH} was inaccurate: I had seen it as
> creating solely a separate clause.
>
> charghwI' a.k.a William Martin gives an example: {Qu'vam ta'lu'meH
> nuH lugh wIvnISlu'}. I would have interpreted this as "in
> order for the task to be accomplished, a correct weapon needs
> to be chosen", but I now perceive that, similarly to some Asian
> languages, {Qu'vam ta'lu'meH} can be a qualifier of {nuH}, changing
> the interpretation to be "a correct for-the-task-to-be-accomplished
> weapon needs to be chosen".
>
> The other example which charghwI' gives is {Qatlh qechvam
> vIQIjmeH Qu'} ["The for-explaining-this-idea task is difficult"], as
> opposed to {vIQIjmeH Qatlh qechvam} ["This idea is difficult for
> explaining"], which implies there is an intentional nature to
> the idea being difficult in order to benefit the explaining. While I
> can realize the difference when presented with it, I've not yet had
> enough exposure to Klingon usage to have arrived at this
> understanding on my own.
>
> I'm sure this is not news for the people here, but for me, having
> only recently begun to study Klingon, it opens up possibilities.
>
<-meH> can be a difficult suffix to bend your mind around, especially for
native English speakers without much exposure to other languages. It is also
(like *many* other things) not explained extremely well in TKD. It is,
however, a wonderful aspect of the language.
You've gotten the main difficulty of <-meH> - it can modify a verb *or a
noun*. <-meH> clauses modifying a verb are easy for English speakers, since
they parallel English fairly well, but they're harder with nouns.
The other difficulty with <-meH> clauses is that they seem to sometimes have
an implied indefinite subject (normally indicated with <-lu'>), especially
when modifying nouns. A good example of this is the phrase <ghojmeH taj>,
often translated as "boy's knife", but literally "knife for learning".
There's no obvious subject for the <ghoj> here. It's certainly not the
<taj>, since the <taj> isn't the one doing the learning. The HolQeD article
you mentioned (I think; it may be another) does a good job of analyzing this
phenomenon.
pagh 'utlh