tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Sep 17 07:38:51 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: nom*i*nal*ize 2. to convert (an underlying clause) into a noun phrase
qe'San:
>> Sule'choHmeH yantaHghachDaj bobejnIS. ghIq boqeqlI'chu'
>> in order for you to become exceptional you need to watch his
>> sword manipulation then train perfectly
SuStel:
>Your sentence is correct, but you don't need -ghach for this.
> Sule'choHmeH yantaH 'e' bobejnIS; ghIq peqeqnISchu'lI'.
>
>> Or can I add -chu'? It seems right to me to have verb qualification
>> on the pre-nominalized verb rather than a qualification on the noun.
>
>We have no rule against it, but again {'e'} makes this easier:
> Sule'choHmeH yanchu'taH 'e' bobejnIS...
>
>> On another subject there, am I right to use -lI' on boqeqlI'chu' or
>> does qeq imply an ongoing aspect by it's very meaning?
>
>{qeq} does not imply "ongoing" or "ongoing toward a known stopping
>point." Leaving the -lI' off would not be wrong, but including it
>makes the sentence that much more specific in meaning.
Two thoughts...
I'm not sure {-lI'} is appropriate here. What is the "known goal or ... definite stopping point" (cf. TKD p.42) of {qeq} "practice, train, prepare"? Proficiency? Or just the end of the training session (e.g. 4:00)? A skilled warrior trains his entire life so as not to become rusty.
WRT {yan} "wield, use or manipulate a sword" also consider {raQ} "manipulate by hand, handle":
KGT 79: The closest to a general term in this realm may be the verb {raQ}, which means "manipulate by hand, handle". It can be applied to carving, sculpting, metalworking, and the like but is really much less specific, referring to activities that involve having some control over some object. For example, in addition to saying {betleH yan} ("He/she wields a bat'leth"), one could say {betleH raQ} ("He/she controls a bat'leth").
To me this would focus more on his technique rather than the idea of wielding a sword (vs. shooting a disruptor).
--
Voragh
Canon Master of the Klingons