tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 07 18:05:06 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: S31: {maq} vs. {'e' maq}
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: S31: {maq} vs. {'e' maq}
- Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2004 11:04:25 +1000
- Bcc:
jIghItlhpu':
>So, you mean something like this?
>jatlh <ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'> ('e') maq.
jangpu' Paul:
>No, I mean like:
><ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'> jatlh. maq.
>"He said <the klingon guard is approaching>. He proclaimed it."
I don't know about the gloss "He proclaimed it" (I'd translate it as just
"He proclaimed"), but the Klingon is perfectly acceptable IMO. (Just
remember that {SuvwI'} actually means "warrior", not "guard" - which is
{'avwI'}.)
>The problem is not so much *in*direct quotations, but direct quotations.
>This last example is an indirect quotation, and I'm fairly confident it's
>correct Klingon. But how it differs is that it does not indicate a
>specific phrase. The reality could be, "he" had actually proclaimed
>"Guard Ho!", but the sentence merely indicates what was communicated, not
>what was said.
That's an interesting take on it. ?{ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI' 'e' maq}. Nobody
has to have actually said {ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'}. Someone could have said
something more like {peyep'eghmoH! ghoSlI' tlhIngan SuvwI' jay'!} "Be
careful! The #@&$ Klingon warrior is coming!" which still communicates the
same thing. I don't think I can answer this; I don't know of any canon that
supports this idea one way or the other.
>Remember, /jatlh/ and /ja/ are *exceptions* to the rule for /'e'/ (and
>/net/, really).
None of the verbs of saying (including {tlhob} and others) use {'e'} and
{net}, as you point out later in your message. That's why I said that {ghoS
tlhIngan SuvwI' 'e' maq} grates on me a bit. It sounds too close to {ghoS
tlhIngan SuvwI' 'e' jatlh}, which is not correct Klingon.
>Actually, reading back on page 67 of the TKD, the book merely says that
>"verbs of saying (say, tell, ask, etc.)" don't use /'e'/ and /net/. So
>the question we should be asking is, "is /maq/ a 'verb of saying'?"
Yes, I think so; in my view it's no different to {jang}, {jach}, {SaQ},
{tlhup}, etc. And note that the list given in TKD includes "ask", which
isn't a normal verb of speech in Klingon (I'll cite the canon later in this
message), so I'd include {maq} with these in not using {'e'}.
>I would be inclined to say it is, even if we don't have canon for it.
>What's the reference for where /ja'/ and /jatlh/ are the "only" verbs this
>works for? Or is it simply that those are the only two we have examples
>for?
No, there's canon. charghwI' conducted an interview with Okrand (printed in
HolQeD 7:4, pp. 2-12), wherein verbs of speaking are discussed at some
length:
MO: Very few. Verbs of speech are "say" verbs, like {jatlh} and {ja'}.
WM: In English, we use many of them.
MO: Yes. In English, we say, "Give me some water," he said. "Give me
some water," he pleaded. "Give me some water," he yelled.
WM: He added. He begged. He opined.
MO: Exactly. I think that's an English thing to do. That's not a Klingon
thing to do. In Klingon, you {jatlh} and you {ja'}. That's about it. The
guard asked the prisoner a question. He replied. He said, "[gestures a
quotation he never quite made]"
Although, if you read the rest of this interview (at
http://klingonska.org/canon/1998-12.txt) Okrand very neatly avoids saying
*anything* concrete about indirect quotation. :)
>Another thing I just noticed in the TKD on this topic -- the parts can
>appear in either order:
>ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI' jatlh
>jatlh ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'
>According to p67, either one is correct... Which really kinda sucks,
>because if they were traditionally treated more like objects, I could say
>something like "If you use /'e'/, it's an indirect quotation, but if you
>don't, it's a direct quotation."
Yeah, I grappled with that for a while too. But that's another reason why I
tend to shy away from using {'e'} to point to a spoken sentence - because
it's not really an object. The two sentences are grammatically separate,
borne out by the fact that the verb of saying (in this case, {jatlh})
doesn't agree with the spoken sentence: {<ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI'> jIjatlh}.
It's almost like you're "acting out" the sentence that was actually spoken.
Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
Play Love Hunt to win a $9000 holiday and find love!
http://mobilecentral.ninemsn.com.au/mclovehunt/lovehunt.aspx