tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 18 09:43:43 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: use of DIng
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: use of DIng
- Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 09:42:25 -0700 (PDT)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sbcglobal.net; s=s1024; t=1253292146; bh=yB4VPTMzqX9O+53KP1du1CeQSU0jdwPlAJrTu7hp0DA=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Xhp7tfSjyEtKOFC2Ps3Ov+Sg7bNhJzp1uRr2/a2AKfEkUzFDTgFPoQi4D63BEnWZdUBIqozyVXG20SeXlqMrP3G8oZoKZG+t34A+j50gt2IVKeqKnUPM2+IHVRKxTGO2rn4JEWxzO/+e+wQD5mxphf3wsGpEDN/kvtARflOmfAI=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=KaxgmKrfAxAQtFzyrmPBmg4z24wltGPYZ5EFA6h8FZIsi3Pjam4E6wr9iZPbkXILZtWFTd1FmCaWq21CgC+EEiE2YxUV9Vcvs5zg8BeNOGk4Im1QY5pvIzp7f7vLrpCWMx/kbsYxtgkXPf/Xw8rQDCndY8cgeNG+LAv2xsFRlP0=;
- In-reply-to: <20090918090312.a41e5a76f06d90ef255b5a241771595e.813017964d.wbe@email.secureserver.net>
Why am I not surprised?
-- ter'eS
--- On Fri, 9/18/09, David Trimboli <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: David Trimboli <[email protected]>
> Subject: RE: use of DIng
> To: [email protected]
> Date: Friday, September 18, 2009, 11:03 AM
> Frankly, I think that's a terrible
> way to reason out linguistic puzzles.
> Even if one assumed a homogeneous culture, one's language
> need not
> necessarily mimic it by subjective example.
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: RE: use of DIng
> > From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
> > Date: Fri, September 18, 2009 10:44 am
> > To: [email protected]
> >
> >
> > I'm tending to think you are right on philosophical
> grounds: since Klingons prefer action, they probably prefer
> to be the actor rather than the one acted upon, so the
> simple stem of most verbs would describe the subject as
> performing (or experiencing) the verb (the intransitive
> usage), with {-moH} available for when you want to refer to
> the agency that causes them to undergo the verb
> (transitive). By that reasoning, for verbs we have no canon
> for that can go either way in English, my default assumption
> would be that they are intransitive in Klingon. If my memory
> wasn't so bad, I'd cite some examples!
> >
> > -- ter'eS
> >
> > --- On Fri, 9/18/09, Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
> > > Subject: RE: use of DIng
> > > To: "'[email protected]'"
> <[email protected]>
> > > Date: Friday, September 18, 2009, 8:30 AM
> > > ter'eS:
> > > >> Does anyone recall if we know whether
> {DIng} is
> > > transitive or
> > > >> intransitive? Is the subject the thing
> turned or
> > > the person who
> > > >> turns the thing?
> > >
> > > lay'tel SIvten:
> > > >I couldn't find any canon for it. Since
> merely adding
> > > {-moH} would
> > > >make it the transitive version, I hope it's
> the
> > > intransitive meaning.
> > > >If it's the transitive meaning already, then
> it's a lot
> > > harder to
> > > >get the intransitive meaning.
> > >
> > > There's no canon for {Ding} "spin" - or {tlhe'}
> "turn"
> > > either. Like lay'SIv, I imagine they both work
> like
> > > {jIr} "rotate, twirl" vs. {jIrmoH} "twirl X,
> cause X to
> > > rotate". (The context in KGT p.59-60 was
> specifically
> > > about bat'leth movements, but I imagine {jIrmoH}
> can be used
> > > for other things as well.)
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Voragh
> > >
> > > Canon Master of the Klingons
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
>
>