tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 18 20:18:26 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Grammar Highlight Each Day (net + -lu')

voragh:

The thing that you've missed is that the pronoun {net} IMPLIES the {-lu'} on
the second verb, therefore making it unnecessary, redundant, repetitive and
unneeded. {{:)>

There is never a REASON to use {-lu'} on the second verb when you use {net}.
The whole reason it seems that Okrand came up with {net} was to avoid using
{-lu'} on the second verb with {'e'}, and then he subsequently did so anyway
in TKW, as you point out. I winced when I saw that. I really think he just
forgot that he made {net} to solve this problem.

The problem with using {-lu'} on the second verb with {'e'} is that it
essentially creates a weird sort of passive voiced Sentence As Subject
construction, which isn't supposed to exist in Klingon.

Anyway, I thought it was a weird statement to say that {-lu'} is not allowed
on the second verb in an SAO with {net}. That is fundamentally a different
kind of statement than the one you made because the one you made is a simple
rule we are not supposed to break, even though it would make sense if we
broke it. The chutqoq that peHruS suggests is not really a rule, but
breaking it would be gibberish.

It would be like saying that it is against the rules to say {vIlegh'egh} or
{jIleghchuq}. Whether there's a rule or not, these are meaningless.

SarrIS

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Boozer [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, January 18, 2001 2:39 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Grammar Highlight Each Day (net + -lu')
>
>
> peHruS:
> : When the pronoun {net} refers back to a previous sentence as the object
> : of the verb, that verb may not take the type 5 suffix {-lu'}.
>
> Wrong.  That verb - called by Okrand the "second verb" in his
> explanation in
> TKD p. 65f. - may not take a Type *7* (aspect) suffix:
>
>   "Klingon has two special pronouns, {'e'} and {net}, which refer to
>    the previous sentence as a whole. They are used primarily, though
>    not exclusively, with verbs of thinking or observation (such as
>    know, see). They are always treated as the object of the verb, and
>    the verb always takes a prefix indicating a third-person singular
>    object. What is a single sentence in English is often two sentences
>    in Klingon. {net} is used only under special circumstances, but
>    {'e'} is common... In complex sentences of this type, the second
>    verb never takes an aspect suffix."
>
> ... a rule even Okrand has violated on occasion.  I can find no
> mention of any
> other suffix types being disallowed.  Where do you derive this
> "rule" from?
> Certainly not from observation, as we have only two canonical
> examples with
> {net}, both discussed in TKD (loc. cit.):
>
>   qama'pu' DIHoH net Sov
>   One knows we kill prisoners. TKD
>
>   Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej
>   One certainly finds it useful for the mission. TKD
>   "You will find it useful." (ST3 subtitles)
>
> Now if you look at {'e'} which is more common than and, as far as we know,
> works the same as {net}, we find:
>
>   yInlu'taH 'e' bajnISlu'
>   Survival must be earned. TKW
>
>   yay chavlu' 'e' bajnISlu'
>   Victory must be earned. TKW
>
> Using {-lu'} on the second verb of a SAO may be poor style in
> your opinion, but
> it is grammatical.  Or have I missed something?
>
>
>
> --
> Voragh
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>

Back to archive top level