[109810] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Imperatives and {-be'}
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Thu Jul 6 15:02:06 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <e46dcad8-6d1e-c497-41a2-e41a3baba5e0@gmx.de>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:02:02 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============9144892015262614641==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c06abb87f9d0b0553aac074"
--94eb2c06abb87f9d0b0553aac074
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
lieven:
> Anyway, to avoid this, use -Ha' instead. It can be use in imperatives.
You mean something like {HIvoqHa'Qo'} for "don't mistrust me" ?
qunnoq
On 6 Jul 2017 9:54 pm, "Lieven" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 7/6/2017 11:14 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
>> "Even though tkd says that {-be'} cannot be used with imperatives, it
>>> seems that this means only that it cannot be used to form negative
>>> imperatives. For example, a sentence such as {HIleghbe'moH} seems to be
>>> possible"
>>>
>>> I can't understand this. Isn't the {HIleghbe'moH} a negative imperative
>>> ? Doesn't it mean "make me not see !" ?
>>>
>>
> Am 06.07.2017 um 17:28 schrieb SuStel:
>
>> boQwI' is wrong.
>>
>
> Don't be so strict; just because boQwI' mentions something we have no rue
> for, it does not mean that it's wrong. As you said, there is no example for
> or against this, so you cannot be sure at all.
>
> I don't know how the creator came to that conclusion. It would be
>> convenient if we could, but TKD prohibits it and I don't think we've ever
>> seen a counterexample.
>>
>
> TKD does not explicitely prohibit THIS example, it prohibits using -be' in
> the puporse of a negative imperative. Opposed to other suffixes, -be' is a
> Rover and changes its meaning depending on where it stands.
>
> (besides, always keep in mind that TKD was never intented to be 100%
> complete, so thhe author may just have skipped this specific situation.)
>
> What we can be sure of is that {HIleghmoHbe'} is forbidden, because the
> -be' negates the command {HIleghmoH}, so we need -Qo' here.
>
> If I'd stick to the rules, I should just replace the be' with the -Qo' and
> get {HIleghQo'moH}... but wait: "Unlike {-be',} the position of {-Qo'} does
> not change" (TKD) so it comes to the end: {HIleghmoHQo'} - but that is
> something else, right?
>
> Just like the note in boQwI', I am also convinced that the following
> phrases should be grammatical:
>
> {HIleghmoH} "make me see"
> {HIleghbe'moH} "make me not see"
> It's different from "Don't make me see", which is different in English as
> well.
> {HIleghbe'moHQo'} "Don't make me not see"
>
> Anyway, to avoid this, use -Ha' instead. It can be use in imperatives.
>
> --
> Lieven L. Litaer
> aka Quvar valer 'utlh
> Grammarian of the KLI
> http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
> http://www.klingonwiki.net
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
--94eb2c06abb87f9d0b0553aac074
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">lieven:<div dir=3D"auto">>=C2=A0<span style=3D"font-fa=
mily:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">Anyway, to avoid this, use -Ha' ins=
tead. It can be use in imperatives.</span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span sty=
le=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"><br></span></div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">You mean something like {H=
IvoqHa'Qo'} for "don't mistrust me" ?</span><span sty=
le=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"><br></span></div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">qunnoq</span></div></div><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 6 Jul 2017 9:54=
pm, "Lieven" <<a href=3D"mailto:levinius@gmx.de">levinius@gmx=
.de</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote=
" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">O=
n 7/6/2017 11:14 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"m=
argin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
"Even though tkd says that {-be'} cannot be used with imperatives,=
it seems that this means only that it cannot be used to form negative impe=
ratives. For example, a sentence such as {HIleghbe'moH} seems to be pos=
sible"<br>
<br>
I can't understand this. Isn't the {HIleghbe'moH} a negative im=
perative ? Doesn't it mean "make me not see !" ?<br>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<br>
Am 06.07.2017 um 17:28 schrieb SuStel:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
boQwI' is wrong.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Don't be so strict; just because boQwI' mentions something we have =
no rue for, it does not mean that it's wrong. As you said, there is no =
example for or against this, so you cannot be sure at all.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I don't know how the creator came to that conclusion. It would be conve=
nient if we could, but TKD prohibits it and I don't think we've eve=
r seen a counterexample.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
TKD does not explicitely prohibit THIS example, it prohibits using -be'=
in the puporse of a negative imperative. Opposed to other suffixes, -be=
9; is a Rover and changes its meaning depending on where it stands.<br>
<br>
(besides, always keep in mind that TKD was never intented to be 100% comple=
te, so thhe author may just have skipped this specific situation.)<br>
<br>
What we can be sure of is that {HIleghmoHbe'} is forbidden, because the=
-be' negates the command {HIleghmoH}, so we need -Qo' here.<br>
<br>
If I'd stick to the rules, I should just replace the be' with the -=
Qo' and get {HIleghQo'moH}... but wait: "Unlike {-be',} th=
e position of {-Qo'} does not change" (TKD) so it comes to the end=
: {HIleghmoHQo'} - but that is something else, right?<br>
<br>
Just like the note in boQwI', I am also convinced that the following ph=
rases should be grammatical:<br>
<br>
{HIleghmoH} "make me see"<br>
{HIleghbe'moH} "make me not see"<br>
It's different from "Don't make me see", which is differe=
nt in English as well.<br>
{HIleghbe'moHQo'} "Don't make me not see"<br>
<br>
Anyway, to avoid this, use -Ha' instead. It can be use in imperatives.<=
br>
<br>
-- <br>
Lieven L. Litaer<br>
aka Quvar valer 'utlh<br>
Grammarian of the KLI<br>
<a href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher" rel=3D"noreferrer" targe=
t=3D"_blank">http://www.facebook.com/Klingo<wbr>nteacher</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://www.klingonwiki.net" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank"=
>http://www.klingonwiki.net</a><br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org" target=3D"_blank">tlhIngan-Ho=
l@lists.kli.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.<wbr>cgi/tlhinga=
n-hol-kli.org</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>
--94eb2c06abb87f9d0b0553aac074--
--===============9144892015262614641==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============9144892015262614641==--
