tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 20 15:18:33 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9, 2007)
At 04:24 PM Tuesday 2/20/2007, you wrote:
>ja' QeS 'utlh:
> >(I don't see why it shouldn't be interpreted) as "topic" in the same way as
> >in Klingon {cheng'e' muqIppu'} "As for Chang, he hit me".
'ISqu':
>I doubt {cheng'e' muqIppu'} is grammatical unless we assume
>that the noun <cheng'e'> is a stand-alone sentence fragment
>followed by a grammatically complete verb/sentence <muqIppu'>.
>
>Although in TKD (3.3.5) the suffix {-'e'} is presented
>as the syntactic marker of the TOPIC of the sentence, the examples
>of its use provided on page 29 indicate that it functions as the
>marker of FOCUS, not topic.
>
>In linguistics, FOCUS is a term that refers to information, in a sentence,
>that
>- is new,
>- is of high communicative interest,
>- is marked by stress,
>- typically occurs late in the sentence, and
>- complements the presupposed information typically presented
> early in the sentence.
>
>E.g.: Your books are on the _shelf_.
> It was _math_ that gave him trouble.
>
>This is precisely how {-'e'} fuctions in the examples found in in TKD (p.
>29):
>
>----------------
> {lujpu' jIH'e'} <I, and only I, have failed.>
> (Obviously, that should be {jIlujpu'})
> <It is I who has failed.>
>
> {De''e' vItlhapnISpu'} <I needed to get the INFORMATION.>
> <It was the information (and not
> something else) that I needed.>
>
> Without the {'e',} these same sentences would have
> no noun singled out for emphasis:
>
> {lujpu' jIH} <I have failed.>
> [Again, it should be {jIlujpu'}]
>
> {De' vItlhapnISpu'} <I needed to get the information.>
>----------------
>
>Now, a TOPIC of a sentence is a noun phrase that expresses what
>the sentence is about, and to which the rest of the sentence is
>related as a comment.
>
>E.g.: _That new Mazda_, I'd like to test-drive it.
>
>Do we in fact have any canon examples of nouns marked with {-'e'} which are
>truly topicalized and appear in sentence initial position?
cheng'e' DaH yISam!
Find Chang. ST6
qIbDaq SuvwI''e' SoH Dun law' Hoch Dun puS.
You would be the greatest warrior in the galaxy. ST5
yIntaHvIS qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay' batlh 'etlhvam chenmoHlu'pu'
this sword of honor descends from the time of Kahless the Unforgettable. S8
Here are a few others where {-'e'} is clearly acting as a focus:
tlhIngan'e', tera'ngan'e', romuluSngan'e'
[... a Klingon, a Terran, a Romulan] (ST5)
chorghSaD qelI'qam HIvchuq'e' vInoH
Estimating attack range in 8,000 kellicams. ST5
DaHjaj SuvwI''e' jIH
Today I am a warrior. TKW
All of these, of course, would make perfect sense if {-'e'} were
omitted. {-'e'} adds extra emphasis.
FYI, Okrand was interviewed in HolQeD 4.2 (by charghwI' IIRC). Inter alia
they discussed {-'e'}:
Q: That's another thing people have been hassling about, because
you called {?'e'} the topic marker, and all the time you use it
as a focus marker.
MO: And they're making the distinction... You're using topic like
topic/comment.
Q: You've been saying things like "As for the ship, it's big,"
which is focus.
MO: I stand corrected.
Q: So it really is a focus marker, then?
MO: Yeah.
Finally, I don't have KGT with me, but charghwI' once posted on the
discussion there of {-'e'} in Morska dialect:
In one of the descriptions of a Klingon dialect (Morska, I think), Okrand
remarks that the dialect does not normally add the {-'e'} to the subject of
a "to be" sentence. This explains the <Dujvets 'o nuq, reen> line in ST5...
in this dialect, sometimes the speaker uses the {-'e'} and other times he
does not. When he does, it indicates focus, as in, "As for my name, it is
charghwI'." When it is missing, the sentence merely means, "My name is
charghwI'." Okrand points out that for speakers of any other dialect of
Klingon, there is no way to distinguish between the existence or absence
of focus on the subject of a "to be" sentence. The {-'e'} is needed for
arbitrary syntax and does not imply focus.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons