tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 02 18:32:23 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: new word #3
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: new word #3
- Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 11:32:02 +1000
- Bcc:
jIja':
>In my opinion, given the second gloss "take into account", one might be
>able
>to say {HolQeD qel paqvam} "this book takes linguistics into account, this
>book considers linguistics"; it could be said about, say, an archaeology
>textbook that also deals with glottochronology. But it's nonetheless a big
>step from {HolQeD qel paqvam} "this book takes linguistics into account" to
>{HolQeD bop paqvam} "this book is about linguistics".
mujang Voragh, ja':
>My point was that I don't know whether Klingons anthropomorphize
>(Klingonomorphize?) inanimate objects as we often do often.
Yes, I know. I just wasn't so sure whether {qel} was restricted to
"consider" in the sentient-thinking sense, particularly since I had very
little canon to back up an argument either way. Nevertheless, you've
provided me with some more evidence, and it does seem that your
interpretation is probably the correct one.
Although it's
>true that we often say in English that "the book talks about X" or "the
>books discusses X" or even "this article describes X", I'm not sure we can
>do this in Klingon. Remember, Klingons don't even anthropomorphize their
>pets - i.e. they're grammatically things, not people or, in Klingon terms:
>they're {'oH}/{-mey} nouns, not {ghaH}/{-pu'} nouns.
That's true, and one uses Clipped Klingon to one's pets - implying that
they're not even "Klingon" enough to be able to be called "you". I wasn't
able to find any other Klingonomorphising (!) verb usages, either.
jIja'taH:
>That being said, the only canon instances I could find of {qel} are the
>proverb {Hoch nuH yIqel} "consider every weapon!" and its parallel {Hoch
>DuH
>yIqel} "consider every possibility!", which are both clearly talking about
>sentient consideration.
mujangqa' Voragh, ja':
>All of Okrand's examples have a person as its subject. Only Mailing List
>usage has extended it to articles, books, plays, films, and the like for
>lack of an alternative.
With the additional canon you've provided, yes, it seems the chance of {qel}
being able to take a subject incapable of thinking gets considerably
slimmer.
>But now we have {bop}.
Yes, and isn't it marvellous? {{;)
Savan,
QeS la'
taghwI' pabpo' / Beginners' Grammarian
not nItoj Hemey ngo' juppu' ngo' je
(Old roads and old friends will never deceive you)
- Ubykh Hol vIttlhegh
_________________________________________________________________
REALESTATE: biggest buy/rent/share listings
http://ninemsn.realestate.com.au