tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 07 04:38:35 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: S31: {maq} vs. {'e' maq}

QeS lagh ([email protected]) 

ghItlhpu' Paul:

>I still think I'd go with the /'e'/ construction.  :)  "Proclaim",
>according to Dictionary.com, has only a transitive verb form.  Of course,
>Klingon isn't English.

That's true. There's no verb in Klingon that cannot take no-object prefixes: 
{jImaq} is just as valid and legal as {vImaq}. Remember that this doesn't 
only mean "no object", but it also can do for objects what {-lu'} does for 
subjects: it indicates that the object of the action is unimportant, 
unspecified or vague.

>Perhaps if /maq/ was put at the end, so that, translating to "(He)
>proclaims (it)", where (it) has been contextually defined...  But if you
>put it at the end like that, it doesn't seem like such a stretch to use
>/'e'/ to specifically identify the object...

So, you mean something like this?

jatlh <ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'> ('e') maq.

That could work. But putting in {'e'} starts to raise some issues about the 
possibilities of indirect quotation, and I don't think MO's ever told us how 
indirect quotation in Klingon works, or even whether it's possible. With 
{'e'}, it just sounds too much to me like saying {ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI' 'e' 
jatlh}. That's why I'd avoid it, but make your own decision about that.

QeS lagh

_________________________________________________________________
10,000 children need sponsors ? change a life:  
http://ad.au.doubleclick.net/clk;9294008;9739733;y?http://www.worldvision.com.au/childsponsorship/search/child_search.asp?om=1

Back to archive top level