tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 26 15:59:43 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: The specifics of indefinites
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: The specifics of indefinites
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 09:58:56 +1000
- Bcc:
QIj voragh:
>You're making this far too complicated. You don't need all these {-lu'}s
>or even {net}. {-lu'} "is used to indicate that the subject is unknown,
>indefinite, and/or general" (TKD p.38) and many of Okrand's examples there
>use "someone/something". The someone you want may be unknown, but s/he is
>not "indefinite, and/or general"; you have a specific, if unknown, someone
>in mind. For that, use the noun {vay'} "someone, anyone":
So the distinction between <vay'> and <-lu'> is that <vay'> is more often
referential (i.e. it picks out a target, even if I don't know what that
target is), and <-lu'> more often non-referential? qatlho'qu'.
But that still leaves my question unanswered - can <neH> use <net>, or do we
have to resort to <vay'> or something else? Do we have any canon support one
way or the other (for instance, the usage of <vay'> as you describe)?
>Whenever you translate "someone", don't automatically think {-lu'} or
>{net}. Consider using {vay'}.
It's just that I have seen <'e' Sovlu'> or the like crop up so many times in
my personal writing. Errors of grammar like these are part of my Klingon,
and I am doing my best to eradicate them one by annoying little one. :)
Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
SEEK: Now with over 50,000 dream jobs! Click here
http://ninemsn.seek.com.au/