tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 20 22:49:43 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: JangmeH toch De'wI' lo'

>Your explanation is very good, Sangqar, but there's one thing I object to.
>Every Klingon sentence does NOT have a time context.  Some sentences can
>simply lack any such reference.  This may not be ambiguity for stylistic
>reasons; the time context may simply not be important.
>
>English speakers often get confused when translating to or from Klingon,
>because it is impossible to say anything in English without tense.  An
>English sentence MUST be set in the past, present, or future.  This isn't
>true in Klingon.
>
>If I say that /yaS qIp puq/ means
>
>The child hit the officer.
>The child hits the officer.
>The child will hit the officer.
>
>I'm not saying that it means one of these.  It means all of them at once.
>It means that at some unspecified point in time, past, present, or future,
>we don't know which, a child hits an officer.  I'm unable to translate the
>sentence accurately into English, because English MUST have tense.

I agree.  Deliberate ambiguity for stylistic reasons is not the only reason 
a time context may not be explicitly stated.

<snip>

>The point is that the time in which it's true is entirely
>irrelevant to the concept communicated.

That's a good point.  The same would apply to most of the proverbs in TKW.

>SuStel

-Sangqar

_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Back to archive top level