tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 03 14:05:15 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Sentences as objects

Terrence Donnelly ( [KLI Member]

--- On Tue, 11/3/09, qurgh lungqIj <> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 3:59 PM,
> Terrence Donnelly <
> wrote:
> >  --- On Tue, 11/3/09, Tracy Canfield <>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I'm guessing that you can use these in two
> sentences:
> > > jagh jeylu'.
> > > vIQIjpu'.  "The enemy was defeated.  I
> explained
> > > it."  for an equivalent to
> > > "I explained that the enemy was defeated."
> > >
> >
> > I've also used { vIQIj. jIjatlh. jagh jeylu'.}
> >
> Can't you just say {jagh jeylu' 'e' vIQIj.}?
> I always thought that any verb that can take an object
> could be used with
> 'e'/net. jImuj'a'?

Well, I don't think so. As Voragh notes in his post

"Similarly, with verbs of saying (say, tell, ask, etc.), {'e'} and {net} are not used."

The point of Okrand's explanation was that there are no indirect quotations in Klingon, and that direct quotes are actually independent sentences referred to by another independent sentence.

(On the other hand, he also quotes the sentence

"juDev 'ej Dujvam ra'wI' DagheS 'e' vItlhob
I ask you to lead us as commander of this ship. KGT".

which seems to contradict what he said above.)

I guess it ultimately depends on what you consider a verb of saying. I tend to be more conservative and treat any verb that involves conveying information as a verb of saying. Can you ask for something or explain something without saying it?

Besides, it seems less "Englishy" to do it in two (or more) sentences.

-- ter'eS 

Back to archive top level