tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 26 21:16:43 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'?
- From: "Qang qu'wI'" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'?
- Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2007 23:13:42 -0600
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=R82ObTLWz0qkFNgR3BNn99aOxrTERv4+38z5HSWMdzg=; b=gfmgD/ZDnVx4DuI0qJWpzkw2M17F48w68Gh+ESK5/DnKhtrpIEpkRKW6srCNfmYgfSbOe1BzQgKT6AfogOaYOjXRrpEdfnNs3i2ipA6GtQlmKAonzWnMrRoQ9L+L3Kxs/d6Fzo4l1IT9EqmqeOB4CvoYzzUempKFa9YvXNMYrOI=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=nZILNtDaC1C91eNuT/eAK1yFFt+7sgPQid5MQXSAoyvwM/ZbW48teXJNVwKDq4bQwxxrmm/U5u4Hq5fppTrYLA83yW/bu+lPbTU3ONPwDfGb5bPNU/DUC64MXcelwyJkFNzsfU+x9p6xQNiH0Tg2YjVxuGw6X4GGpUhMiKSCfho=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
On Nov 26, 2007 12:16 PM, Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Voragh:
> > > The way I read this is that pronoun-as-verb statements of location require
> > > {-taH} on the pronoun, but questions of location (i.e. those with {nuqDaq}
> > > "where?}) do not. Whether the location is temporary or permanent seems to
> > > be irrelevant.
>
> Qang qu'wI':
> >(unless I missed it) the canon examples appear to leave open how to
> >ask about a specific location, i.e:
> > {pa'DajDaq ghaH'a' HoD'e'}
> >vice
> > {pa'DajDaq ghaHtaH'a' HoD'e'}
> >Any thoughts?
>
> Short answer: I don't know which is preferred. I searched my notes and
> could find NO examples of either interrogative pattern, with or without
> {-taH}.
>
> But, although I would certainly say {pa'DajDaq ghaHtaH'a' HoD'e'}, the
> {nuqDaq [PRONOUN] [NOUN]'e'} examples I cited earlier do give one
> pause. Is {-taH} omitted from the pronoun-as-verb because {nuqDaq}
> expressions are exceptions to the general rules of Klingon syntax, or is it
> because the location is vague or in question? (I.e. How can something
> "continue" to be located somewhere if that location has not been actually
> been established in the first place?)
>
qatlho'! much appreciated.
The way MO uses {-taH} in the TKD "to be" section without explanation
naturally causes one to puzzle over possible explanations. Reading
between the lines here, MO apparently hasn't further elaborated on
what he was thinking.
One of the ideas that I originally had was that perhaps it added a
meaning similar to adding 'right now' in DIvI' Hol. "The captain is
in his quarters right now." That would allow a distinction along the
lines of {pa'DajDaq ghaH HoD'e'} "The captain is in his quarters" in
the sense of "The captain said he was going to his quarters, I didn't
actually see him in his quarters, but that's where he should be" vice
{pa'DajDaq ghaHtaH HoD'e'} with the stronger "I just came from there,
and the captain is in his quarters right now". Of course, since MO
didn't actually translate that way I've always kept this
interpretation at a distance.
But ignoring the minor nuisance that the idea is likely totally wrong
(<g>), that would allow {nuqDaq ghaH HoD'e'} to be the question asked
indifferent to the extra urgency of the 'right now' sense, whereas
{nuqDaq ghaHtaH HoD'e'} would then of course be "Where is the captain
right now?" (informing the respondent to be extra careful about
certainty of the captain's location).
--
Qang qu'wI'