tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 22 19:12:27 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: 'e' vIneH

> > When saying this aloud, I would pause, to indicate these were separate
> > thoughts, and saying just {vIneH} after a pause seems to leave the verb 
>with
> > no object (that's how it feels to me, anyway).  Although I guess it 
>could be
> > interpreted as a simple non-sequitur:
> >
> > I'm travelling to Europe next year.  I want it.
> >
> > This leaves me thinking, 'Want what?'.
>
>Do you want it separate or not? Just make up your mind and express your 
>intent.
>If you waffle, then it will sound like you are waffling.

My intention here was that the second sentence be an afterthought; 
temporally separate but logically sequential.  The hypothetical 
counter-example I provided was (as I mentioned) a non-sequitur - NOT 
logically sequential.  No waffling.

> > Please, no advice that I should just say:
> >
> > DIS veb "Europe" vIleng vIneH.
> >
> > Sure, when I'm sitting here writing, I could delete the punctuation and
> > simply add {vIneH}  But if I were speaking, I couldn't delete the pause 
>I'd
> > just made.  (Just trying to forestall the inevitable "You're making it 
>too
> > complex" response.)
>
>It sounds like you are fixating on a problem that a person speaking the
>language would never worry about. You want there to be a shade of meaning 
>that
>people will pay special attention to in a place where conversational 
>language
>doesn't worry about such peculiarities.
>
>When people talk in any language, they think while talking and much of what
>they say is grammatically incorrect or imprecise, but since each phrase 
>exists
>within a larger context, as each phrase is parsed, it is compared to that
>context. If it enhances or extends that context, it is accepted. If it is 
>at
>odds with the context and the continuing context continues to be at odds 
>with
>it, it is usually ignored. If it is less obviously at odds with the 
>context,
>the person talking with you will probably ask you to more precisely explain
>what you meant.

My whole point was: if I got into a situation where I had expressed a 
complete thought, and after finishing the spoken sentence, and giving enough 
of a pause that my listeners recognize it was the end of a thought; then I 
had an afterthought wanted to clarify that this was a desire and not a 
certainty, how would I do it?  Would it require {'e'}?  When I said it out 
loud to myself, the {vIneH} part sounded like a completely separate, 
non-sequential thought, and not a logical continuation.  You say such a 
thought would be ignored.  What if I don't want it to be ignored?  What if I 
want to make sure people realize it is an afterthought and not a 
non-sequitur?

In my experience, a non-sequitur is not ignored unless a relatively large 
number of people are involved in the conversation (and even then, it is 
generally only ignored by part of the group).  The flow of the conversation 
stops while people try to figure out what is going on.  I didn't want that 
to be the outcome of my hypothetical situation.  But maybe it's different 
when speaking Klingon.  Someday I'll have to save up enough money for a 
{qep'a'} (or convince some other people around here to take up Klingon so I 
can have a {qepHom}) so I can get a handle on the dynamics of conversation 
in Klingon.

>I'll also comment that when you say, "And please don't give me X advice..." 
>it
>sounds a bit presumptive on your part. It's like you want your problem to 
>be so
>special that it has to be handled just so.
>
>In this list, we are all members. We meet as peers with widely varied 
>talents
>and experiences. Things are generally smoother when we don't try to control 
>the
>responses to what we've said by setting up criteria we want met before 
>others
>have their chance to respond as they are most naturally driven to respond. 
>For
>all you know, you might be shutting down a useful response from an angle
>slightly different from that which you presumed.
>
>That's not intended to be an attack; just simple advice. Ignore it if you
>mistakenly find it offensive.

SuStel made this same point by providing the advice I thought I didn't want. 
  I assumed people would not realize that I was asking about spoken, not 
written language, so I added that clarification at the end of my post.  It 
was a mistake.  You're correct (even though that means I'll have to risk 
getting advice meant for another situation in order to avoid cutting off the 
possibility of the correct advice for my actual situation).

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

Back to archive top level