tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Sep 29 19:10:20 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: ta
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: ta
- Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 12:09:55 +1000
- Bcc:
jIja'pu':
>But in that very same article, we're told that Klingon opinions differ on
>whether {-pu'} or {-mey} is proper for those birds:
> "The plural suffix for birds is usually {-mey}, the general plural
> suffix, as would be expected. There is a difference of opinion,
> however, about which plural suffix to use for a few birds capable
> of mimicking speech, such as the {vIlInHoD} and the {qaryoq} (and
> the larger {qaryoq'a'}), with some Klingons using {-mey} but others
> preferring {-pu'}, the plural suffix for beings capable of using
> language." (HQ 10.4)
>While it does go on to say that Maltz prefers {-mey}, the fact that we're
>explicitly told that some Klingons do use {-pu'} shouldn't be ignored IMHO.
>Plus, we're not told whether one or the other is more common.
mujang Voragh, ja':
>As we know, explicitly marking plurality is optional in Klingon anyway:
Now it's my turn to be forgetful. {{:) That had completely slipped my mind.
>"Unlike English, however, the lack of a specific suffix for plural
>does not always indicate that the noun is singular. In Klingon, a
>noun without a plural suffix may still refer to more than one entity.
>The plurality is indicated by a pronoun, whether a verb prefix or a
>full word, or by context... Fortunately for students of Klingon, it
>is never incorrect to add a plural suffix to a noun referring to more
>than one entity. Even in those cases where it is unneccessary to do
>so."
"Even in those cases where it is unnecessary"... could that be referring to
inherently plural nouns like {cha}, {ngop} and {negh} (thus ??{chamey},
??{neghpu'})?
>Though plural suffixes are not obligatory on nouns ({SuvwI'} can
>mean either "warrior" or "warriors"), Klingons are fussy about the
>verb prefixes. (msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand 9/97)
Which is probably a consequence of the relative freedom that exists
vis-à-vis the noun suffixes.
>The rule-obsessed prescriptivists won't like it but, as "Federation
>linguist" Okrand plays the game, his grammar is supposed to be
>descriptivist in nature - describing how the majority of Klingons speak the
>standard {ta' Hol} dialect. There's always a little variation that the
>foreigner should be aware of, even if he doesn't speak that way
>him/herself.
The variation that exists is just one reason why I love this language:
things are not as restrictive as they may seem at first glance.
Descriptivists forever, I say.
>Getting back to Data, I can imagine that Worf almost certainly considered
>it as a thing when he first met it/him,
Knowing the general distrust that Klingons seem to have for thinking
machines, that sounds likely.
>but may have gradually - almost without noticing it - began regarding him
>as a person over the seven years he knew him, eventually becoming quite
>friendly and often discussing the behavior of the humans they served with.
>If Worf ever discussed his life on Enterprise in Klingon (say, in a letter
>to his brother or in his personal log), I'll bet at some point he started
>using the "person" suffixes WRT Data. And while we're speculating here, I
>can even imagine Worf speaking Klingon *with* Data on occasion just to keep
>in practice; after all, Data can download the grammar and all relevant
>dictionaries from the ship's computer to learn any known language virtually
>instantaneously. If so, the question now becomes: "Which set of suffixes
>would Data use to refer to himself?" <g>
Judging by his yearning to be human throughout the series, he may well have
used {-wI'} and {-pu'} just out of wishful thinking. {{:)
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
_________________________________________________________________
Sell your car for $9 on carpoint.com.au
http://www.carpoint.com.au/sellyourcar