tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 20 09:35:03 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: QongDaqDaq
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003, David Trimboli wrote:
> > My mind doesn't see any tense at all in the setance, it just makes it a
> > general something that is/has/will occur but doesn't tie it down to any
> > particular time. Hence the reason I over use the aspect markers.
>
> It doesn't HAVE tense. Time is determined purely by context, of which this
> sentence has none.
I know it doesn't have tense, hence the reason my mind doesn't see it,
what I was questioning was how the translation suddenly gained tense...
> This is pretty much an arbitrary rule for English so far as I can see, much
> like the rule that you're not allowed to split infinitives. Tell it to
> biblical translators.
Well, my English teacher who taught me while I was growing up in England
told me specfically to never start a sentance with a conjunction. It's bad
grammer... As for biblical translators, someone needs to teach them how to
translate..
> I see no reason to assume that Klingon can't use sentence conjunctions at
> the beginning of sentences, especially when there are previous sentences in
> the utterance.
Hmm... a conjunction implys a joining of two sentances, why would a
Klingon waste time using a conjunction is there was no other sentance to
connect to?
> > tlhIngan Hol jatlh Qanqor 'ej 'oH vISov!
> > Krankor speaks Klingon and I know it!
>
> No. /'oH/ is not the right pronoun. /'e'/ is used for that.
Why can't I use 'oH in that sentance? It's not grammicatally incorrect.
Both "tlhIngan Hol jatlh Qanqor" and "'oH vISov" are perfectly fine
setances. Just if I said:
tlhIngan Hol jatlh Qanqor 'ej 'oH yIlIjQo'!
Krankor speaks Klingon and don't you forget it!
I think saying that you _have_ to use a pronoun in a particular place is
limiting the possibilities of the language. Yes 'e' is used to refer to
the previous sentance, but if the whole topic of conversation is Krankor
and his speaking, 'oH would work fine. I'm telling you not to forgot
something much more than the sentance that 'e' could refer to.
Yes, I could do:
tlhIngan Hol jatlh Qanqor 'ej 'e' yIlIjQo'!
And don't forget that Krankor speaks Klingon!
But to me it doesn't have the same feeling. My "it" is bigger in scope
than "'e'". 'oH can be anything from an atom to the universe, 'e' can
only be the last sentance...
> /'oH/ MIGHT be substituting for /ngoDvam/ or something, but don't delude
> yourself: you're using the wrong tool. Don't try to justify yourself out of
> having to learn how to use it!
I know very well how to use it, I've been using it for nearly a decade,
I'm trying to expand beyond the confines of it.
>
> > Kosher, smosher... I want to get the meaning across, not worry about
> > semantics :) but I get the idea.
>
> Until you can get your meaning across grammatically, you're speaking a
> Klingon-like language, not Klingon.
Heh... When you speak English, your actually speaking an English-like
language, when you speak Klingon your speaking a Klingon-like language.
No matter how hard you try, there will always be slight differences in
peoples interpretaions of grammactical rules and the meanings of words.
Language is a barrier as well as tool. No one speaks any language 100% as
it is written in the books, because even the books contradict each other
at times. Even Okrand breaks his own rules... The point of language is to
communicate, if I can fulfil that goal then it was successful even if
someone thinks it's not grammatical, I will have still used the language
for the purpose it was created.
qurgh