[102581] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects, direct and indirect
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Will Martin)
Tue Nov 24 17:45:24 2015
From: Will Martin <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:56:33 -0500
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmPQ1iBv1tiboa7W4Qv9kmSmHo9YXPe8eVc0JN6G+JPQZw@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============0030088103025913724==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_EF084DC0-0485-4478-826D-881112895BDC"
--Apple-Mail=_EF084DC0-0485-4478-826D-881112895BDC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=utf-8
I=E2=80=99m in the process of being swayed by the =E2=80=9Cvalents=E2=80=9D=
argument, trying to sort out the details of it, but I=E2=80=99ll point =
out that applying these ideas to {ja=E2=80=99} might be a poor choice if =
it=E2=80=99s being used as a verb of speech for direct quotation =
purposes, since that=E2=80=99s a special case with unusual grammar.
pItlh
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv
> On Nov 24, 2015, at 2:00 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> De'vID:
>>> If {SoHvaD quv vIja'} =3D {quv qaja'} and {jIHvaD quv Daja'} =3D =
{quv
>>> choja'}, can these be combined using the prefix trick into *{quv
>>> maja'chuq}? After all, we can combine {qaqIp} and {choqIp} into
>>> {maqIpchuq}.
>=20
> QeS 'utlh:
>> There are a lot of problems with that idea. Firstly, what would the
>> non-prefix-tricked version of this be?
>=20
> {maHvaD quv wIja'}
>=20
> QeS 'utlh:
>> Secondly, the prefix trick can only
>> *add* an object to the verb prefix, not delete one.
>=20
> The object isn't deleted here, it's hidden by {-chuq}.
>=20
> {SoHvaD quv vIja'} =3D {quv qaja'}
> "I-tell-it honour for-the-benefit-of-you" =3D "I-tell-you honour"
>=20
> {chaHvaD quv wIja'} =3D {quv DIja'}
> "we-tell-it honour for-the-benefit-of-them" =3D "we-tell-them honour"
>=20
> {maHvaD quv wIja'} =3D *{quv maja'chuq}
> "We-tell-it honour for-the-benefit-of-us" =3D "We-tell-each-other =
honour"
>=20
> The prefix trick changes the verb prefix. When you say that it "add"s
> an object, I think you mean it changes "I-it (for you)" to "I-you it",
> right? But the same thing is happening in my example: it changes
> "we-it (for us)" to "we-us it", except that "we-us" is expressed as
> {ma-} + {-chuq}.
>=20
> QeS 'utlh:
>> Thirdly, {maqIpchuq}
>> doesn't mean the same thing as {qaqIp 'ej choqIp}. There need not be =
any
>> second person involved at all in {maqIpchuq}, for that matter. It's
>> misleading to talk about these things being "combined". Put another =
way: in
>> English, we can quite happily say "I talk to you about honour" and =
"you talk
>> to me about honour", but does the superficially "combined" version "I =
and
>> you talk to you and me about honour" make any sense at all?
>=20
> I think what you're saying here is that {maH} can mean "he and I" or
> "she and I" and not just "you and I". You're right that Klingon "we"
> can be either inclusive or exclusive, but I was just using an example.
> We could have just as easily carried out the analysis with {jIHvaD}
> and {ghaHvaD}, etc. Maybe it was confusing to break up "we" as "you
> and I" in my example, and I should've just done everything as {maH}.
>=20
> QeS 'utlh:
>> Finally,
>> combining {qaqIp} and {choqIp} is not the prefix trick anyway, so =
talking
>> about combining concepts "using the prefix trick" just doesn't make =
sense at
>> all to me. I honestly just don't understand it.
>=20
> Does the transformation of {maHvaD quv wIja'} into {quv maja'chuq}
> make more sense?
>=20
> 1. the prefix trick lets us indicate the "indirect object" of the verb
> by using a verb prefix that treats it as though it were the "direct
> object"
> 2. when the subject and object are both {maH} and the subjects are
> acting on each other, it's expressed as {ma-} with {-chuq}
>=20
> To me, it does look just like an application of two rules together,
> which is not to say that that's how they would work together.
>=20
> Similarly:
> {maHvaD Qu'maj wIqawmoH} =3D *{Qu'maj maqawchuqmoH}
>=20
> --=20
> De'vID
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--Apple-Mail=_EF084DC0-0485-4478-826D-881112895BDC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D""><div class=3D"">I=E2=80=99m in the process of being swayed by =
the =E2=80=9Cvalents=E2=80=9D argument, trying to sort out the details =
of it, but I=E2=80=99ll point out that applying these ideas to {ja=E2=80=99=
} might be a poor choice if it=E2=80=99s being used as a verb of speech =
for direct quotation purposes, since that=E2=80=99s a special case with =
unusual grammar.</div><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 24, 2015, at 2:00 AM, De'vID <<a =
href=3D"mailto:de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com" =
class=3D"">de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D"">De'vID:<br =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D"">If {SoHvaD quv vIja'} =3D {quv qaja'} and {jIHvaD quv Daja'} =
=3D {quv<br class=3D"">choja'}, can these be combined using the prefix =
trick into *{quv<br class=3D"">maja'chuq}? After all, we can combine =
{qaqIp} and {choqIp} into<br class=3D"">{maqIpchuq}.<br =
class=3D""></blockquote></blockquote><br class=3D"">QeS 'utlh:<br =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D"">There are a lot of =
problems with that idea. Firstly, what would the<br =
class=3D"">non-prefix-tricked version of this be?<br =
class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">{maHvaD quv wIja'}<br =
class=3D""><br class=3D"">QeS 'utlh:<br class=3D""><blockquote =
type=3D"cite" class=3D"">Secondly, the prefix trick can only<br =
class=3D"">*add* an object to the verb prefix, not delete one.<br =
class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">The object isn't deleted here, =
it's hidden by {-chuq}.<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">{SoHvaD quv vIja'} =
=3D {quv qaja'}<br class=3D"">"I-tell-it honour for-the-benefit-of-you" =
=3D "I-tell-you honour"<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">{chaHvaD quv wIja'} =
=3D {quv DIja'}<br class=3D"">"we-tell-it honour =
for-the-benefit-of-them" =3D "we-tell-them honour"<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">{maHvaD quv wIja'} =3D *{quv maja'chuq}<br =
class=3D"">"We-tell-it honour for-the-benefit-of-us" =3D =
"We-tell-each-other honour"<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">The prefix =
trick changes the verb prefix. When you say that it "add"s<br =
class=3D"">an object, I think you mean it changes "I-it (for you)" to =
"I-you it",<br class=3D"">right? But the same thing is happening in my =
example: it changes<br class=3D"">"we-it (for us)" to "we-us it", except =
that "we-us" is expressed as<br class=3D"">{ma-} + {-chuq}.<br =
class=3D""><br class=3D"">QeS 'utlh:<br class=3D""><blockquote =
type=3D"cite" class=3D"">Thirdly, {maqIpchuq}<br class=3D"">doesn't mean =
the same thing as {qaqIp 'ej choqIp}. There need not be any<br =
class=3D"">second person involved at all in {maqIpchuq}, for that =
matter. It's<br class=3D"">misleading to talk about these things being =
"combined". Put another way: in<br class=3D"">English, we can quite =
happily say "I talk to you about honour" and "you talk<br class=3D"">to =
me about honour", but does the superficially "combined" version "I =
and<br class=3D"">you talk to you and me about honour" make any sense at =
all?<br class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">I think what you're =
saying here is that {maH} can mean "he and I" or<br class=3D"">"she and =
I" and not just "you and I". You're right that Klingon "we"<br =
class=3D"">can be either inclusive or exclusive, but I was just using an =
example.<br class=3D"">We could have just as easily carried out the =
analysis with {jIHvaD}<br class=3D"">and {ghaHvaD}, etc. Maybe it was =
confusing to break up "we" as "you<br class=3D"">and I" in my example, =
and I should've just done everything as {maH}.<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">QeS 'utlh:<br class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D"">Finally,<br class=3D"">combining {qaqIp} and {choqIp} is not =
the prefix trick anyway, so talking<br class=3D"">about combining =
concepts "using the prefix trick" just doesn't make sense at<br =
class=3D"">all to me. I honestly just don't understand it.<br =
class=3D""></blockquote><br class=3D"">Does the transformation of =
{maHvaD quv wIja'} into {quv maja'chuq}<br class=3D"">make more =
sense?<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">1. the prefix trick lets us indicate =
the "indirect object" of the verb<br class=3D"">by using a verb prefix =
that treats it as though it were the "direct<br class=3D"">object"<br =
class=3D"">2. when the subject and object are both {maH} and the =
subjects are<br class=3D"">acting on each other, it's expressed as {ma-} =
with {-chuq}<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">To me, it does look just like =
an application of two rules together,<br class=3D"">which is not to say =
that that's how they would work together.<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">Similarly:<br class=3D"">{maHvaD Qu'maj wIqawmoH} =3D =
*{Qu'maj maqawchuqmoH}<br class=3D""><br class=3D"">-- <br =
class=3D"">De'vID<br class=3D""><br =
class=3D"">_______________________________________________<br =
class=3D"">Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br class=3D""><a =
href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org" =
class=3D"">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br =
class=3D"">http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol<br =
class=3D""></div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_EF084DC0-0485-4478-826D-881112895BDC--
--===============0030088103025913724==
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
--===============0030088103025913724==--
