[109817] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Imperatives and {-be'}
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Thu Jul 6 15:48:18 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <ae9722b9-0366-6ede-4614-593db10ee8ff@gmx.de>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 22:48:13 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============8508775327413767459==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c13014cb0a5b70553ab65d5"
--94eb2c13014cb0a5b70553ab65d5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
lieven:
> We have had problems with that already when it comes to
> direct objects (cf. yIghojmoH)
What's the problem with {yIghojmoH} ?
On 6 Jul 2017 10:32 pm, "Lieven" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 06.07.2017 um 21:07 schrieb SuStel:
>
>> There sure is an example against this:
>>
>
> I was talking abut canon phrases as an example.
>
> TKD's explicit pronouncement that *-be' *is not used with imperatives.
>>
>
> true.
>
> Maybe Okrand meant it only can't be used to negate the sense of /do this!/
>> but he didn't say that.
>>
>
> That how I read it: commands are "do it" and to say "don't" use {-Qo'}
>
>> What we can be sure of is that {HIleghmoHbe'} is forbidden, because the
>>> -be' negates the command {HIleghmoH}, so we need -Qo' here.
>>>
>>
>> So how about **yIta'vIpbe'?*
>>
>
> What about it? It seems clear to me: yIta'vIpQo'
>
> TKD doesn't say you replace *-be'* with *-Qo'.*
>>
>
> It doesn't use the verb "replace", but it says
> /The suffix {-be'} cannot be used with imperative verbs. For imperatives,
> the following suffix is required: {-Qo'} "don't!, won't"/
>
> It makes perfect, logical sense. But it's forbidden by TKD. Until such
>> time as Okrand gives us an unambiguous example,
>>
>
> True.
>
> After some thinking about that, I believe the problem is not so much
> within the -be' suffix, but more with the -moH. We have had problems with
> that already when it comes to direct objects (cf. yIghojmoH)
>
> TKD says that be' cannot be used with "imperative verbs". Now taking this
> literally, I think that we have looked at the -moH part too closely. When
> giving a negative command, Qo' is used, but a verb with -moH makes it two
> "verbs" (or actions), where the "cause" is seen as an action, and this one
> is not negative.
>
> Well, nevertheless, we won't know without asking Maltz.
>
> --
> 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
>
--94eb2c13014cb0a5b70553ab65d5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">lieven:<div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-=
serif;font-size:13.696px">> We have had problems with that already when =
it comes to=C2=A0</span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:=
sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">> direct objects (cf. yIghojmoH)</span><b=
r></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">What's =
the problem with {yIghojmoH} ?</span><br></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_ex=
tra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 6 Jul 2017 10:32 pm, "Lieven&qu=
ot; <<a href=3D"mailto:levinius@gmx.de">levinius@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<b=
r type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 =
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Am 06.07.2017 um 21:0=
7 schrieb SuStel:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
There sure is an example against this: <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
I was talking abut canon phrases as an example.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
TKD's explicit pronouncement that *-be' *is not used with imperativ=
es. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
true.<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Maybe Okrand meant it only can't be used to negate the sense of /do thi=
s!/ but he didn't say that.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
That how I read it: commands are "do it" and to say "don'=
;t" use {-Qo'}<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">
What we can be sure of is that {HIleghmoHbe'} is forbidden, because the=
-be' negates the command {HIleghmoH}, so we need -Qo' here.<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
So how about **yIta'vIpbe'?*<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
What about it? It seems clear to me: yIta'vIpQo'<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
TKD doesn't say you replace *-be'* with *-Qo'.*<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
It doesn't use the verb "replace", but it says<br>
/The suffix {-be'} cannot be used with imperative verbs. For imperative=
s, the following suffix is required: {-Qo'} "don't!, won't=
"/<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
It makes perfect, logical sense. But it's forbidden by TKD. Until such =
time as Okrand gives us an unambiguous example, <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
True.<br>
<br>
After some thinking about that, I believe the problem is not so much within=
the -be' suffix, but more with the -moH. We have had problems with tha=
t already when it comes to direct objects (cf. yIghojmoH)<br>
<br>
TKD says that be' cannot be used with "imperative verbs". Now=
taking this literally, I think that we have looked at the -moH part too cl=
osely. When giving a negative command, Qo' is used, but a verb with -mo=
H makes it two "verbs" (or actions), where the "cause" =
is seen as an action, and this one is not negative.<br>
<br>
Well, nevertheless, we won't know without asking Maltz.<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>
--94eb2c13014cb0a5b70553ab65d5--
--===============8508775327413767459==
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
--===============8508775327413767459==--
