[101796] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Piraha
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Martin)
Mon Nov 2 08:26:33 2015
From: Will Martin <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5636747B.80603@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 08:26:17 -0500
To: Lieven <levinius@gmx.de>
Cc: "tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org"
<tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============4610881028042153150==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C35262C1-3E17-48D7-87B0-15EEE46AF489"
--Apple-Mail=_C35262C1-3E17-48D7-87B0-15EEE46AF489
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
Comments below:
pItlh
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv
> On Nov 1, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
>=20
>> On 11/1/2015 5:49 AM, qunnoQ HoD wrote:
>>> 1. a basic rule in Klingon is one main verb per sentence
>=20
> {mataHmeH maSachnIS} "we must expand to survive", two verbs in one =
sentence.
>=20
The {-meH} clause is not a main verb.
>>> 2. in Klingon we can't apply multiple adverbs to a single verb
>=20
> I'm not sure what is considered an adverb, but I think I'd accept =
{batlh nom Soppu'} "He ate quickly with honor=94
I=92d love for this to be acceptable, but apparently Okrand has never =
offered us a canon example that has two adverbials and has never given =
us advice on their use. It=92s not so much that we can=92t do it as it =
is that we don=92t know that we can. We do know that when we would have =
expected two adjectives applied to a noun, Okrand changed one of them to =
a relative clause, likely to avoid the issue, and we=92ve seen him use =
multiple relative clauses in the example you cite below.
>>> 4. in Klingon we tend to think we can=92t use two adverbs for a =
single
> [...]
>> We don't have any evidence I can think of that lets us use two
>> adjectival verbs on a single noun.
>=20
> For the record, we have the somehow poetic and controversial phrase in =
the warriors anthem {yoHbogh matlhbogh je SuvwI'}
>=20
>> I prefer to make BOTH qualities into relative clauses, for symmetry.
>> E.g., {HoSbogh tlhIngan 'ej 'IHbogh} "strong and beautiful Klingon."
>=20
> I prefer this too.
In this case, I think it=92s a matter of style and either way is =
acceptable. {=91IHbogh tlhIngan HoS} is my preferred construction, being =
more efficient, and placing both descriptors closer to the noun they =
describe. But I fully accept both HoSbogh tlhIngan =91ej =91IHbogh} or =
{HoSbogh =91IHbogh je tlhIngan}. In this case, the {je} is functioning =
as saying =93also=94 to the verb of the relative clause, rather than =
ending a list of nouns. =93the Klingon who is strong and also powerful.=94=
Your preference is more like =93The Klingon who is strong and who is =
powerful=94.=20
Both are quite valid, as is =93the strong Klingon who is beautiful=94. =
The only one we don=92t know to be valid would be =93The strong, =
beautiful Klingon=94.
> --=20
> Lieven L. Litaer
> aka Quvar valer 'utlh
> Grammarian of the KLI
> http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
> http://www.klingonwiki.net
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--Apple-Mail=_C35262C1-3E17-48D7-87B0-15EEE46AF489
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=windows-1252
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D"">Comments below:<div class=3D""><br class=3D""><div class=3D"">
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: =
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; "><div class=3D"">pItlh</div><div =
class=3D"">lojmIt tI'wI'nuv</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div></span><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class=3D""><div><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">On Nov 1, 2015, at 3:22 PM, Lieven <<a =
href=3D"mailto:levinius@gmx.de" class=3D"">levinius@gmx.de</a>> =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">On 11/1/2015 5:49 AM, =
qunnoQ HoD wrote:<br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">1. =
a basic rule in Klingon is one main verb per sentence<br =
class=3D""></blockquote></blockquote><br class=3D"">{mataHmeH maSachnIS} =
"we must expand to survive", two verbs in one sentence.<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div></blockquote><div><br class=3D""></div><div>The {-meH} =
clause is not a main verb.</div><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D""><div class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">2. in Klingon we can't =
apply multiple adverbs to a single verb<br =
class=3D""></blockquote></blockquote><br class=3D"">I'm not sure what is =
considered an adverb, but I think I'd accept {batlh nom Soppu'} "He ate =
quickly with honor=94</div></blockquote><div><br class=3D""></div><div>I=92=
d love for this to be acceptable, but apparently Okrand has never =
offered us a canon example that has two adverbials and has never given =
us advice on their use. It=92s not so much that we can=92t do it as it =
is that we don=92t know that we can. We do know that when we would have =
expected two adjectives applied to a noun, Okrand changed one of them to =
a relative clause, likely to avoid the issue, and we=92ve seen him use =
multiple relative clauses in the example you cite below.</div><br =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D"">4. in Klingon we tend to think we can=92t use two adverbs for =
a single<br class=3D""></blockquote></blockquote>[...]<br =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">We don't have any =
evidence I can think of that lets us use two<br class=3D"">adjectival =
verbs on a single noun.<br class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">For =
the record, we have the somehow poetic and controversial phrase in the =
warriors anthem {yoHbogh matlhbogh je SuvwI'}<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">I prefer to make BOTH =
qualities into relative clauses, for symmetry.<br class=3D"">E.g., =
{HoSbogh tlhIngan 'ej 'IHbogh} "strong and beautiful Klingon."<br =
class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">I prefer this too.<br =
class=3D""></div></blockquote><div><br class=3D""></div><div>In this =
case, I think it=92s a matter of style and either way is acceptable. =
{=91IHbogh tlhIngan HoS} is my preferred construction, being more =
efficient, and placing both descriptors closer to the noun they =
describe. But I fully accept both HoSbogh tlhIngan =91ej =91IHbogh} or =
{HoSbogh =91IHbogh je tlhIngan}. In this case, the {je} is functioning =
as saying =93also=94 to the verb of the relative clause, rather than =
ending a list of nouns. =93the Klingon who is strong and also powerful.=94=
Your preference is more like =93The Klingon who is strong and who is =
powerful=94. </div><div><br class=3D""></div><div>Both are quite =
valid, as is =93the strong Klingon who is beautiful=94. The only one we =
don=92t know to be valid would be =93The strong, beautiful =
Klingon=94.</div><br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D"">-- <br class=3D"">Lieven L. Litaer<br class=3D"">aka Quvar =
valer 'utlh<br class=3D"">Grammarian of the KLI<br class=3D""><a =
href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher" =
class=3D"">http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher</a><br =
class=3D"">http://www.klingonwiki.net<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">_______________________________________________<br =
class=3D"">Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br class=3D"">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org<br=
class=3D"">http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol<br =
class=3D""></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></div></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_C35262C1-3E17-48D7-87B0-15EEE46AF489--
--===============4610881028042153150==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============4610881028042153150==--
