tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 31 17:15:39 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: it; SIS

Alan Anderson ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

[You can also give it an object and say things like the clouds rained down
cats and dogs. ...or something like that; you get the idea.]

ja' SuStel:
>I wanted someone to say it, and stand behind it.

Huh?  *Marc Okrand* (as reported by DloraH) said it!  It's been copied here
multiple times.  You posted it yourself two days ago.  What do you mean by
"stand behind it"?  If it's a question of whether or not one should believe
DloraH's report of what Okrand told him, say so and we can discuss it.  If
it's a question of whether or not {SIS} refers to more than the weather,
say so and we can discuss it.

(If it's a question of how you personally think {SIS} should work
irrespective of the information we received six years ago, say so -- and
then keep quiet.)

>So is it your contention
>that when a Klingon says /SIS/, he means /SIS 'eng/?  You're saying that
>/'eng/ is the elided word?

I am saying that, yes.  I am saying it because that's what I read in a
reasonably authoritative account of what Marc Okrand said.

>Are you sure that /chal/ doesn't /SIS/?  Are you sure that /Dung/ doesn't
>/SIS/?  Could it be that any or all of these are possible, and the reason
>for the elided word in the common phrase is that it generally doesn't matter
>which of these it is?

If you want to talk about something other than the "science class"
understanding of where rain comes from, you're welcome to do so.  I won't
object to anyone's using {SIS} in a more figurative sense, with something
other than the literal clouds perhaps producing something other than
literal rain.

But according to what we were told six years ago, there *is* a definite
something which rains.  That role is filled by "the clouds" in the extended
example we are given.

>Why is /SIS/ (and, presumably, the other weather
>words) singled out for special it's-too-obvious-to-say treatment?

What "special it's-too-obvious-to-say treatment"?  It looks to me like
*you* are the one singling out {SIS} as something "we" don't know how to
use, ignoring the evidence telling us how to use it, and seeming not to see
how it's used the past few times it has been quoted here (even though you
quoted it directly from the original note by DloraH in 1998).

>And why is there such resistance to considering this on the list?

Who's resisting what here?  You're the one who keeps insisting that the
subject of {SIS} is unknown to us.  You're the one who challenges what
Okrand himself is reported to have said.  You're the one who calls for the
subject to be stated explicitly even after posting it yourself.

So far as I can tell, the resistance is yours.  Only you can answer why.

Back to archive top level