tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 03 14:56:30 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC
Voragh:
> > It may be that the way to use two adverbials with
> > the same verb is seen in this single example:
> >
> > pIj maSuvpu', batlh maSuvpu' 'ej maQapbejta'!
> > In our many battles, we have fought with honor
> > and achieved VICTORY! (Hallmark)
> >
> > Notice that Okrand repeated the verb rather than have two
> > adverbials follow each other directly. Multiple clauses
> > repeating an element is fairly common in Klingon sentences,
ter'eS:
>I think one could argue that the Hallmark example is a bit of rhetorical
>flourish and not representative
>of real speech.
Perhaps, though the English Okrand translated lacks flourish. (At least to
me.)
>OTOH, as I think about it, I can't come up with too many instances where
>you'd need
>two true adverbs in a row
Except for time- and place-stamps, you're probably right.
>But I think having to say {DaHjaj bIr muD 'ej naDev bIr muD} is going
>beyond redundancy into
>persniketry. It just sounds stupid.
Indeed. You made the same mistake I did with that Anthem example
earlier. {DaHjaj} and {naDev} are NOT adverbs in Klingon; they're nouns
serving as time- and place-stamps: {DaHjaj naDev bIr muD}.
We both gotta stop thinking anglocentrically. <g>
>Sorry; this doesn't convince me. Absence of evidence, etc. Unless/until
>Okrand definitively bans
>multiple adverbials with a single verb, I will continue to keep them in my
>"toolkit".
As I said, it was only a suggestion. This may be more style over grammar
anyway. Like the Klingon preference for putting subordinate and purpose
clauses first in complex sentences.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons