tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 02 13:12:21 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Cogito ergo sum (was RE: Numbers with pronouns)

David Trimboli ( [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

Christopher Doty wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 11:17, Mark J. Reed <> wrote:
>> Sequence of events: Okrand was asked to translate "To be or not to be"
>> for Star Trek VI.  He came up with {taH pagh taHbe'}, inventing the
>> verb {taH} on the spot, obviously a back-formation from the suffix.
> I was responding to the fact that, as far as I know, we don't have
> examples of a bare verb functioning as a sort of infinitive.

We sort of do. KGT has all sorts of "infinitive" phrases in examples; 
that is, the phrases leave off any indication of person. It is as if 
they refer to 3rd-person singular arguments. For instance:

    ngem Sarghmey tlha'
    chase forest sarks

It wasn't translated "He/she/it/they chase(s) forest sarks."

It might be possible to view {taH pagh taHbe'} in the same say. Hamlet 
is thinking "Should I choose {taH} or {taHbe'}?" not "Should I choose to 
go on or not to go on?" He's thinking about the WORDS.

It could also simply be clipped.

tlhIngan Hol MUSH

Back to archive top level