[110829] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] With "joq" - how do we choose the right verb
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Fri Sep 1 14:41:11 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <9b72cf66-460c-79fd-9ed4-ff5e32771141@trimboli.name>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 19:13:27 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============8214488471662108303==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e082210e498621a0558230a02"
--089e082210e498621a0558230a02
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
SuStel:
> even in English we don't use one consistent rule.
The same happens in Greek too.
Why doesn't someone who knows 'oqranD personally, send him a mail in order
to clarify the matter ?
qunnoq
On Sep 1, 2017 19:08, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 9/1/2017 11:32 AM, demonchaux.aurelie wrote:
>
> Thank you all for your replies and thoughts on this !
>
>
>
>
>
> * HIq qIj reghuluS 'Iw HIq ghap jab They serve Black Ale or Regulan
> bloodwine. (CK) {A B ghap jab} =E2=80=9Cthey serve them=E2=80=9D not {luj=
ab} =E2=80=9Cthey serve
> it=E2=80=9D*
>
>
> This is a great example, and I think this gives us the solution, thank yo=
u
> for digging it up!
>
> I was convinced that if A and B were both singular, "A B ghap" would be
> considered singular when choosing the verb prefix, and that's why I thoug=
ht
> joq might be singular in those cases, and I couldnt choose between singul=
ar
> or plural. But this proves the contrary !
>
> So, to sum up, whether A and B are singular or plural, and whether we use
> je or ghap, A + B + je / ghap is always plural.
>
> Logically, A + B + joq is thus also always plural !
>
> So the correct sentence in my example is:
> vIraS Hol tlhIngan Hol joq DIghojnIS
>
> tuQaHmo' Satlho' :)
>
> It's an interesting data point, but I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.
> Okrand forgets the prefix *lu-* often enough that he even points out that
> Klingons forget *lu-* more than any other prefix.
>
> Then there's this example from *HolQeD* 12:2*,* which seems to contradict
> your analysis:
>
>
> *naQ megh'an 'er'In ghap yI'uch **grasp either end of the stick*
>
> The words *'er'In* and *megh'an* are *definitely* intended to be singular
> here. If a *ghap* construction always got interpreted as plural, the verb
> should have been *tI'uch,* but it wasn't. And yes, sometimes Okrand
> forgets to use *tI-* and uses *yI-* instead. So we have two contradictory
> conclusions, each of which is based on examples with grammatical rules th=
at
> Okrand commonly gets wrong.
>
> Finally, even in English we don't use one consistent rule. *Either Bob or
> Linda are coming over.* A finicky grammarian would complain that the verb
> should have been *is;* nobody else would even have noticed. I could
> easily see a native English speaker, constructing a Klingon sentence,
> following the same fuzzy rules.
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
--089e082210e498621a0558230a02
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;f=
ont-size:13.696px">SuStel:</span><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font=
-size:13.696px"><br></span></div><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font=
-size:13.696px">> even in English we don't use one consistent rule.<=
/span><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.=
696px"><br></span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-s=
erif;font-size:13.696px">The same happens in Greek too.</span></div><div di=
r=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"><br></=
span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-=
size:13.696px">Why doesn't someone who knows 'oqranD personally, se=
nd him a mail in order to clarify the matter ?</span></font></div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13.696px"><br>=
</span></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span style=
=3D"font-size:13.696px">qunnoq</span></font></div></div><div class=3D"gmail=
_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sep 1, 2017 19:08, "SuStel&q=
uot; <<a href=3D"mailto:sustel@trimboli.name">sustel@trimboli.name</a>&g=
t; 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">
=20
=20
=20
<div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF">
<div class=3D"m_-6564900499219960275moz-cite-prefix">On 9/1/2017 11:32 =
AM,
demonchaux.aurelie wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">Thank you all
for your replies and thoughts on this !<br>
<br>
<i>
HIq qIj reghuluS 'Iw HIq ghap jab <br>
<br>
=C2=A0 They serve Black Ale or Regulan bloodwine. (CK)<br>
<br>
{A B ghap jab} =E2=80=9Cthey serve them=E2=80=9D not {lujab} =E2=80=
=9Cthey serve it=E2=80=9D</i><br>
<br>
<br>
This is a great example, and I think this gives us the solution,
thank you for digging it up! <br>
<br>
I was convinced that if A and B were both singular, "A B ghap&qu=
ot;
would be considered singular when choosing the verb prefix, and
that's why I thought joq might be singular in those cases, and I
couldnt choose between singular or plural. But this proves the
contrary !<br>
<br>
So, to sum up, whether A and B are singular or plural, and whether
we use je or ghap, A + B + je / ghap is always plural.<br>
<br>
Logically, A + B + joq is thus also always=C2=A0 plural ! <br>
<br>
So the correct sentence in my example is: <br>
vIraS Hol tlhIngan Hol joq DIghojnIS<br>
<br>
tuQaHmo' Satlho' :)</blockquote>
<p>It's an interesting data point, but I wouldn't jump to that
conclusion. Okrand forgets the prefix <b>lu-</b> often enough
that he even points out that Klingons forget <b>lu-</b> more than
any other prefix.</p>
<p>Then there's this example from <i>HolQeD</i> 12:2<i>,</i> which
seems to contradict your analysis:</p>
<blockquote>
<p><b>naQ megh'an 'er'In ghap yI'uch<br>
</b><i>grasp either end of the stick</i></p>
</blockquote>
<p>The words <b>'er'In</b> and <b>megh'an</b> are <i>defini=
tely</i>
intended to be singular here. If a <b>ghap</b> construction
always got interpreted as plural, the verb should have been <b>tI'=
;uch,</b>
but it wasn't. And yes, sometimes Okrand forgets to use <b>tI-</b=
>
and uses <b>yI-</b> instead. So we have two contradictory
conclusions, each of which is based on examples with grammatical
rules that Okrand commonly gets wrong.<br>
</p>
<p>Finally, even in English we don't use one consistent rule. <i>Ei=
ther
Bob or Linda are coming over.</i> A finicky grammarian would
complain that the verb should have been <i>is;</i> nobody else
would even have noticed. I could easily see a native English
speaker, constructing a Klingon sentence, following the same fuzzy
rules.<br>
</p>
<pre class=3D"m_-6564900499219960275moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
SuStel
<a class=3D"m_-6564900499219960275moz-txt-link-freetext" href=3D"http://tri=
mboli.name" target=3D"_blank">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org">tlhIngan-Hol@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>
<br></blockquote></div></div>
--089e082210e498621a0558230a02--
--===============8214488471662108303==
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
--===============8214488471662108303==--
