tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 11 15:24:53 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: beachquestion #4: two verbs
Quvar valer wrote:
> > {SuD 'ej wov paqwIj}
> > "My book is bright and it is gyb"
> >
> > {SuD paqwIj 'ej wov}
> > "It is bright and my book is gyb"
SuStel:
>Keep in mind that when you're listening to this in realtime, not
>translating with it in text in front of you, you have to wait until the very
>end to find out what the subject of these verbs is.
> [snip]
>Now this probably isn't significant in the case of two simple verbs: you can
>listen to them as a single "verb," /SuD 'ej wov/.
>
> SuD 'ej wov paqwIj'
> My book is /SuD/-and-bright.
>
>You'd be able to parse this pretty easily when listening to it.
It's no more of a problem than listening to songs or other verse: e.g.
"Black is the color of my true love's hair." (Granted, we don't do this in
our day-to-day speech.) Or, to take a Klingon example from the Warrior's
Anthem:
yoHbogh matlhbogh je SuvwI'
Say'moHchu' may' 'Iw.
The blood of battle washes clean
The Warrior brave and true.
("The battle blood perfectly cleans the warrior who is brave and loyal.")
Remember, too, that due to tlhIngan Hol's normal OVS word order, Klingons
are conditioned to wait until the end of the sentence for the subject anyway.
> > So theoretically, we could say things like
> > {matlhbogh 'ej nongbogh 'ej SuDbogh 'ej vaQbogh SuvwI' vIlegh}
> > "I see the warrior which is aggressive and which is green and which is..."
>
>Theoretically, yes. But what a horrible thing to do to your listener!
>
>"I see <something> which is loyal and which is passionate and which is /SuD/
>and which is aggressive (oh, he's a warrior) -- I see him."
This should be:
"<something or someone> that is loyal and that is passionate and that is
/SuD/ and that is aggressive -- a warrior, I see him."
You can't even choose which relative pronoun to use until you know whether
it refers to a thing ("which") or a person ("who"). "That" can refer to
either in contemporary usage.
>Remember, Klingon sentences are NOT English sentences backward. Only the
>OVS structure is backward; if you string several clauses in a row, you're
>going to be listening to them in the order they're said, not in reverse order.
True, but how about this series of virtues from "The Klingon Way" (p.74):
DujDaj HubtaHvIS Hegh 'e' tul Hoch tlhIngan.
To die defending his ship is the hope of every Klingon.
Qu'Daj ta'taHvIS Hegh 'e' tul Hoch tlhIngan.
To die in the line of duty is the hope of every Klingon.
wo' toy'taHvIS Hegh 'e' tul Hoch tlhIngan.
To die while serving the Empire is the hope of every Klingon.
You need to wait till the very end to find out what the actual subject of
{Hegh} is. Or how about this famous proverb:
qaStaHvIS wa' ram loS SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD.
Four thousand throats may be cut in one night by a running man. TKD/TKW
(BTW, this is a nice rendering of the English passive voice, which often
places the agent of the passive ["a running man"] at the end, just like the
standard OVS Klingon syntax.)
Expecting your listener to wait until the end is more awkward in English
than in Klingon I expect.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons