tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 26 21:51:56 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: yI- -choH (was core semantic case roles: agent, patient, focus)

Tad Stauffer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

On Wed, 26 May 2004 [email protected] wrote:
> > I don't agree. {yI-} means {yI-} it doesn't mean {yI-verb-choH}. Yes, 
> {yIQong}
> > and {yIQongchoH} may have the same outcome but they don't mean exactly 
> the same
> > thing.
> >
> > The issue may be that English has a hard time dealing with the differences
> > between {yIQong} and {yIQongchoH}, just as it has issues dealing with a 
> word
> > like {DochHom}. This is a down fall of English, not Klingon.

At 01:58 PM 5/26/2004 -0700, ...Paul wrote:
>I would like for you to explain *how* you thing /yIQong/ and /yIQongchoH/
>differ significantly.  I realize there are many constructs/concepts in
>Klingon that don't have a good English *equivalent*, but that does not
>mean that they cannot be *explained* in English.
...
>In fact, would you EVER use /-choH/ on a verb if you put an imperative prefix
>on it?

We have at least one canon example of this in Power Klingon, albeit spoken 
by a non-Klingon:
{yIjotchoH}
The terran wants the Klingon (who is angry) to calm down. The added {-choH} 
just sounds like he is emphasizing a change of state - he wants the Klingon 
to change from angry to calm. To me, this sounds like the difference 
between "Be calm!" or "Stay calm!", and "Calm down!" - the latter suggests 
to me a complete 180 degree change, rather than going from a neutral state 
between calm and angry.

- taD

Back to archive top level