tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 06 11:54:02 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qoSwIj
- From: Christopher Doty <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: qoSwIj
- Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 11:51:14 -0800
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4yBq7cdLVgQlkAIGMiXSeHTYXkGcUjc6J4nrjuucyHY=; b=ifoij11AMInK2xNpA/zFCZT7j1VKSolEAw0mQ87qMRaFGqVxXs5ZYPBYjNeVPPu7iO XXFmjsHs/lXTogEDUwwiEPYBRV+4FGhlfinHilaJ6bJonCKvZo+HAzknFlOP3eAQmXWD 0o9L10TIxQVL6mFz+3v9slOPrc984RHWTVjAk=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=nUmL4SLA8sbLOQsLEH7l7alCN5a+czh9gTql/QCPSpH8TaozSB3TKdUG67HEEJJssS QIwLBT+Vh7mE+T5kBOkr5HN+2jmk68vV3E09Sz+TWRauGVYI5z/MM7+mXssvGSG29ANS 4X9lqj8MDCEX2Cxotm5DHR6DMKyI1Le0kn5sk=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A60113A1A565F8@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu> <[email protected]>
Well, in these non-verbal copular constructions in Klingon, I think
that the pronoun (whether it be ÊitÊ or not) is always referring to
the same thing as the ÊobjectÊ/predicate noun... In something like
<qoSwIj 'oH>
The ÊitÊ of <ÊoH> is referring to birthday--ÊIt is my birthday.Ê
In <DaHjaj qoSwIj ÊoH>, it seems a better translation would be ÊIt is
my birthday todayÊ, and strikes me as fine in both Klingon and
English. Maybe IÊm missing the objection here, but I donÊt see how
one can say that there isnÊt an ÊitÊ in a sentence like <DaHjaj qoSwIj
ÊoH>, since the ÊitÊ is clearly Êmy birthdayÊ
Chris
On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 09:44, Mark J. Reed <[email protected]> wrote:
> But in each case, regardless of the tangibility or concreteness of the
> antecedent noun, there is one: something you can identify as the noun
> that 'it' is standing for. ÂIn a sentence like "Today, it is my
> birthday", there is not really a noun that fits where the "it" is.
> "Today, the day is my birthday"? Â"Today, the date is my birthday"?
>
> Instead, the "it" is just a place holder, because "Today, my birthday
> is." doesn't work as an English sentence (unless it's ÂYoda-speak for
> "My birthday is today." - but there, "today" is a noun instead of an
> adverb).
>
> -marqoS
>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Mark J. Reed:
>>>> I would tend to question the translation {DaHjaj qoSwIj 'oH}. Â"Today
>>>> it is my birthday" is fine in English, but it's one of those weird
>>>> idiomatic uses of "it" that lacks an antecedent (like "It's hot out",
>>>> "It's seven o'clock"). ÂDo we have evidence that Klingon does
>>>> something similar?
>>
>> {'oH} almost always refers to an actual, tangible object but I did find four exceptions:
>>
>> an abstract idea (revenge, honor):
>>
>> ÂbortaS nIvqu' 'oH bortaS'e'
>> ÂRevenge is the best revenge. (TKW)
>>
>> ÂSajlIj 'oHbe' quvwIj'e'
>> ÂMy honor is not your play-thing.
>> Â(lit. "My honor is not your pet.") (STConst p.259)
>>
>> an intangible place (space):
>>
>> ÂveH Qav 'oH logh'e'
>> Âspace--the final frontier (S99)
>>
>> and a geometric figure (i.e. the shape, not the thing it's drawn on):
>>
>> ÂmeyrI'Daq 'oHtaH gho'e'
>> ÂThe circle is in the square. (qep'a' 2005)
>>
>> While the last two might be considered virtual/imaginary objects or places, the first two can't be (however important the concepts are to Klingons).
>>
>>
>> --
>> Voragh
>> Canon Master of the Klingons
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark J. Reed <[email protected]>
>
>
>
>