tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 27 12:38:40 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9, 2, etc.

Steven Boozer ([email protected])



mIq'ey:
> >> qatoy'taH wa'ben 'e' vItagh
> >>
> >>This seems (to me) to mean exactly what we want it to mean. Are there
> >>objections to it from a grammatical (or, for that matter, any other) point
> >>of view?

Voragh:
> >I like this, but the time-stamp should precede the verb:
> >
> >wa' ben qatoy'taH 'e' vItagh.
> >"I began serving you (continuously) a year ago"

mIq'ey:
>But why?  The timestamp applies to the main verb:  it's the beginning, not 
>the continuous service, that's located a year in the past.  (I.e., I see 
>the meaning as "I serve you continuously; a year ago I began it", not "A 
>year ago I serve you continuously; I began it.")  Although I've lost track 
>of my copy of TKD (temporarily, I hope), I'm sure I've seen a number of 
>examples of main clauses where an adverb precedes {'e'}.  Are these 
>wrong?  Is there a special restriction on adverbials of time, parallel to 
>the restriction on the use of aspectual suffixes?

You've hit on one of the problematic points of Klingon grammar.  You're 
right:  There are several examples with an adverbial or a time- or 
place-stamp in the first (or "object") sentence.  E.g.:

   logh veQDaq bachchugh, yoH 'e' toblaHbe' SuvwI'
   Shooting space garbage is no test of a warrior's mettle. (ST5 notes)

   HoD, naDev maH 'e' luSovbe'
   Captain, they don't know we're here. (ST5 notes)

   nIteb Qob qaD jup 'e' chaw'be' SuvwI'
   A warrior does not let a friend face danger alone. (TKW)

   DujDaj HubtaHvIS Hegh 'e' tul Hoch tlhIngan
   To die defending his ship is the hope of every Klingon. (TKW)

   DaH che' ghawran. yejquv DevwI' moj ghawran 'e' wuqta' cho' 'oDwI' Dapu'bogh
     janluq pIqarD HoD.
   Gowron currently presides, named leader of the High Council by Captain 
Jean-Luc
     Picard, who was acting as Arbiter of Succession. (S25)

   naDev bIQumqa' 'e' vItul.
   [untranslated] (st.expert-forum_okrand, MO to SuStel 11/96)

but only one known example where the adverbial belongs to the second 
sentence (the same clause as {'e'}):

   DuraS tuq tlhIngan yejquv patlh luDub 'e' reH lunIDtaH DuraS be'nI'pu'
     lurSa' be'etor je.
   The sisters of the House of Duras, Lursa and B'Etor, are constantly 
seeking a
     higher standing for the House of Duras within the Klingon High 
Council. (S26)

{luDub 'e' reH lunIDtaH} is a problem.  Notice that the second verb has an 
aspect suffix, which we are told is not allowed in a sentence-as-object (SAO):

   In complex sentences of this type, the second verb never takes an aspect
   suffix. (TKD 66)

Because of that, some have wondered whether Okrand just made a careless 
mistake - hey, we've all done it! - making the entire sentence 
ungrammatical.  If so, the adverbial {reH} may also be misplaced.  But 
assuming S26 is otherwise correct, {'e'} may precede the adverbial in the 
second sentence because, in addition to being a direct object pronoun, it 
*may* also be acting as if it were a sort of semi-conjunction separating 
the two clauses.  This is particularly useful in speech.  In writing you 
can, of course, go back and re-read a long, complex sentence.  Be aware 
that other Klingonists disagree with my view of {'e'}.

BTW, We have seen another post-TKD example of an aspect suffix on the 
second verb.  (See the S25 example above.)  Okrand's absolute rule may need 
to be revised slightly to "rarely" instead of "never".  IOW from a 
prescriptive viewpoint it's not allowed, but from a descriptive viewpoint 
it is occasionally heard - similar to the elitist aversion to double 
negatives or "ain't" in English.




--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons






Back to archive top level