tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 18 14:09:14 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: syntax

> I have a question about a word . It came from the banned book thread and the 
> word is hatbogh (Temprature born). Is there some other meaning for the word
> bogh . I dont understand. Deghnegh. 

It is always good to give some context here. I just figured out what you were 
talking about, but it took a while. {Hat} is a noun for "temperature", but it 
is also a verb meaning "be illegal".

Also, while {bogh} is a verb meaning "be born", it also is a Type 9 verb suffix 
marking a relative clause, so {Hatbogh paq} means "the book which is illegal". 
The thread is about a banned book, so the book is illegal.

An example in a complete sentence would be:

Hatbogh paq vIghaj. "I have a book, which is illegal".

We tend to use "which" for translating relative clauses in Klingon, but 
technically, for proper English, that's only true when the relative clause is 
parenthetical, as in that example. The illegality is a side-comment about the 
book. It doesn't identify the book.

Meanwhile, if the relative clause identifies a specific noun, you don't use a 
comma and the word "which" is replaced by "that". That same Klingon sentence 
might be translated as:

"I have the book that is illegal."

Here, you might be asking me if I have a book among a dozen or so you've 
listed. Only one of them is illegal. That's the one I have. When I tell you "I 
have the book that is illegal," I'm pointing out which book I have by the 
reference to its illegality.

This is a common English mistake, however, akin to not knowing the difference 
between "who" and "whom". Most people use ", which" all the time instead 
of "that", even when pointing out things with relative clauses.


Back to archive top level