tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 28 15:02:34 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: adverbials with -Ha'

nuQum stephan:

>>[Voragh] wrote:
>>>  Also, remember that some adverbials already
>>>  have an unrelated opposite - e.g. {nom} "fast, quickly" vs. {QIt} 
>>> "slowly";
>>I should point out that *nomHa' might still be valid -- "not quickly" is
>>not necessarily the same as "slowly".  It might mean something between
>>the opposite cases, which gives some control over specificness.
>but {Ha'} means the opposite, not simply 'not', doesn't it?

{-Ha]} can also mean to undo something or even to do something wrongly:

   This negative suffix implies not merely that something is not done
   (as does {-be'}), but that there is a change of state: something that
   was previously done is now undone. For convenience, it will here be
   translated as "undo", but is closer to the English prefixes mis-, de-,
   dis- (as in misunderstand, demystify, disentangle). It is also used if
   something is done wrongly. Unlike {-be'}, {-Ha'} can be used in
     {chenHa'moHlaH}   "it can destroy them"
   This verb actually means something like "it can cause them to undo
   their form".
     {yIchu'Ha'}       "disengage it!" (e.g. cloaking device)
     {bIjatlhHa'chugh} "if you say the wrong thing"
   This shows how {-Ha'} can be used in the sense of "wrongly". The word
   might be translated as {if you misspeak}. Using {-be'} (that is,
   {bIjatlhbe'chugh}) would mean "if you don't speak".
     {Do'Ha'}          "it is unfortunate"
   The use of {-Ha'} in this sentence suggests a turn of luck from good
   to bad.  (TKD p.47f)

>{batlhHa'} is 'dishonorably', not 'not honorably'.

That's how Okrand translates it.  He introduced it in HolQeD 4.4:

   The word for "dishonorably" is {batlhHa'}. This is clearly the adverbial
   {batlh} "in an honored fashion" plus a suffix {-Ha'}, which might be
   analyzed as the negative suffix that follows verbs or else as a suffix
   identical in form (and meaning?) to it, but which appears with adverbials.
   Whether this {-Ha'} can be added to all adverbials is not clear.

Examples in context:

   batlhHa' vanglu'taHvIS quv chavbe'lu'
   One does not achieve honor while acting dishonorably. TKW

   Qu' buSHa'chugh SuvwI', batlhHa' vangchugh, qoj matlhHa'chugh, pagh ghaH 
   If a warrior ignores duty, acts dishonorably, or is disloyal, he is 
nothing. TKW

Theoretically, {batlhHa'} might also mean "mis-honorably" (e.g. someone 
tried to act honorably, but wasn't successful).  Note his use of the word 
"undo" in TKD, at least WRT verbs: perhaps "dishonorably" in the sense of 
*losing* one's honor, not merely not achieving honor {quv chavbe'} it the 
first place.  Cp. {naDHa'ghach} "discommendation".

>lab DloraH:
>>Another twist, does /batlh bIHeghbe'/ mean "You will not die honorably"
>>  - as in:  You will die, but it will be dishonorably.
>>  - or as:  You will continue to live honorably.
>i'd say, it means: "you will continue to live honorably". ok, so how say 
>the first one?

Well, you can stress the adverbial when speaking, as well as use a suitable 
intonation (e.g. say it with a sneer):  {*batlhHa'* bIHegh}.  In writing, 
you can mark it with asterisks or the like, as I've done, or add 
{-bej}:  {batlhHa' bIHeghbej} "you will definitely die dishonorably".  If 
you want to be absolutely crystal clear, you need to expand them a bit:

   bIHegh, 'ach batlhHa' bIHegh.
   You will die, but you will die dishonorably.

   batlh bIyIntaH.
   You will continue to live honorably.

>apriori with '*':  *{batlhbe' bIHegh}
>my mistake will be that "be'" doesn't work with adverbs, right?

Correct.  But that was the question that started this thread.

Other than {-Ha'} - which Okrand says doesn't work with all adverbials - we 
don't know how to modify or fine tune an adverbial.  As I've mentioned 
earlier, I think that the way to do it is not to look at the adverbial in 
isolation, but as part of an adverbial + verb phrase.  There are relatively 
few Klingon adverbials, but the languages makes up for it with an intricate 
series of adverb-type verb suffixes.

This is, of course, something we need to ask Maltz about.

Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level