[110714] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Referring to the entire preceding passage
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (nIqolay Q)
Fri Aug 18 11:18:32 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cLBdX5DqEmb1LHTx8BTP34zZTgfAnorNkrBKW9-yp+W3Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 11:18:28 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============5952379393444218700==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c11c35c2eaa8d055708a42d"
--94eb2c11c35c2eaa8d055708a42d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
> maj.
>
> However, now, this question comes to mind: Why did 'oqranD write
> {DaSovbej'a'} instead of {'e' DaSovbej'a'} ?
>
> After all, we have the response of 'a'Setbur "my father didn't want that",
> which I don't remember how it was exactly given in klingon, but I remember
> it utilized a {'e'} to refer to the entire preceding speech she was
> referring to.
>
> qunnoq
>
Azetbur wasn't referring to the whole preceding dialogue with {'e'}, just
the sentence Kerla had just said in reply to her. The Klingon Wiki has the
dialogue: http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/ST6
Azetbur: *notlh veS... 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH.* *War is obsolete,
General. As we are in danger of becoming.*
Kerla: *QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS.* *Better to die on our
feet than live on our knees.*
Azetbur: *'e' neHbe' vavwI'.* *That wasn't what my father wanted. *
She might have just been using it for emphasis, in the same way you can add
an explicit {jIH} even if the pronomial prefix includes the first person
singular. Maybe using {'e'} like that is only common among the upper
classes. But I don't think you're going to get a very specific answer on
why Chang didn't use {'e'} with {DaSovbej'a'}.
It seems that the most obvious difference between {chay' 'e' DaSov}, {chay'
DaSov}, and {chay' bISov} is how explicit or emphasized the thing being
known is -- the first version uses an explicit pronoun, the second only
mentions it in the prefix, and the third doesn't mention it at all. In this
case, the correct choice of which to use is probably just up to the
speaker's preference of how specific to be.
Without further information on the subject, I don't think there's anything
to be gained by obsessing over whatever other subtle differences in meaning
these phrases may have, other than perhaps a headache. Pick the one you
think sounds best and move on to the next line to translate.
--94eb2c11c35c2eaa8d055708a42d
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Aug 18, 2017 at 10:00 AM, mayqel qunenoS <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">mihkoun@gmail.com</a>></=
span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0=
px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"auto">maj.<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">However, now, t=
his question comes to mind: Why did 'oqranD write {DaSovbej'a'}=
instead of {'e' DaSovbej'a'} ?</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br>=
</div><div dir=3D"auto">After all, we have the response of 'a'Setbu=
r "my father didn't want that", which I don't remember ho=
w it was exactly given in klingon, but I remember it utilized a {'e'=
;} to refer to the entire preceding speech she was referring to.</div><div =
dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">qunnoq<br></div></div></blockquote=
><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote">Azetbur wasn't referring to the w=
hole preceding dialogue with {'e'}, just the sentence Kerla had jus=
t said in reply to her. The Klingon Wiki has the dialogue: <a href=3D"http:=
//www.klingonwiki.net/En/ST6">http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/ST6 </a><br><br=
>Azetbur: <b>notlh veS... 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH.</b> <i>War is obs=
olete, General. As we are in danger of becoming.</i><br>Kerla: <b>QamvIS He=
gh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS.</b> <i>Better to die on our feet than l=
ive on our knees.</i><br>Azetbur: <b>'e' neHbe' vavwI'.</b>=
<i>That wasn't what my father wanted. </i><br><br>She might have just =
been using it for emphasis, in the same way you can add an explicit {jIH} e=
ven if the pronomial prefix includes the first person singular. Maybe using=
{'e'} like that is only common among the upper classes. But I don&=
#39;t think you're going to get a very specific answer on why Chang did=
n't use {'e'} with {DaSovbej'a'}. <br><br>It seems that=
the most obvious difference between {chay' 'e' DaSov}, {chay&#=
39; DaSov}, and {chay' bISov} is how explicit or emphasized the thing b=
eing known is -- the first version uses an explicit pronoun, the second onl=
y mentions it in the prefix, and the third doesn't mention it at all. I=
n this case, the correct choice of which to use is probably just up to the =
speaker's preference of how specific to be.<br><br>Without further info=
rmation on the subject, I don't think there's anything to be gained=
by obsessing over whatever other subtle differences in meaning these phras=
es may have, other than perhaps a headache. Pick the one you think sounds b=
est and move on to the next line to translate.<br></div></div></div>
--94eb2c11c35c2eaa8d055708a42d--
--===============5952379393444218700==
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
--===============5952379393444218700==--
