[110953] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Two {-'e'}'s in a pronoun sentence.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Tue Sep 12 13:21:07 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CAG84SOu3tAsvCHLLSadP=+=qf3kC2n4FFmyOQwfFSoPzXF83ow@mail.gmail.com>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 20:21:03 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============1990632397719949816==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c119c2a979ba40559014401"
--94eb2c119c2a979ba40559014401
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
nIqolay Q:
> But after a while you have to realize that you're probably not > opening
up productive new avenues of linguistic innovation, > you're just trying to
convince yourself that nonsense isn't
> nonsense.
One thing which truly amazes me on this list, is how some people are always
ready to judge others with regards to the questions they choose to ask.
Has anyone here appointed himself as the klingon-police, who will examine
the quality of other people's questions and pass judgement as far as their
motives for asking are concerned ?
Either you like it or not, different things will concern different people,
and each person will require assistance with regards to the obstacles he
has encountered.
When I ask something, I am not asking in order to just post a question. I
ask because I have come across an obstacle.
Or do I need to explain myself each time I ask something ?
So relax. Noone is defiling your immaculate klingon grammar.
qunnoq
On Sep 12, 2017 8:01 PM, "nIqolay Q" <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:26 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I agree 100% with the analysis provided by lieven.
>>
>> So, if I understand correctly:
>>
>> Yes, we can have the construction {b'e' 'oH a'e'}.
>> Yes, we can have the construction {yadda yadda yadda b'e' 'oHbogh 'a'e'}.
>>
>> If I understand wrong, then do correct me.
>>
>
> How did you get that understanding from the examples people have posted?
> No one else here has used a sentence with two {-'e'} suffixes; most of the
> discussion has been about word order and finding clearer ways to rephrase
> your sentences. The {-'e'} suffix is a topic marker. It has the same
> meaning in the {X 'oH Y'e'} construction as it does in any other sentence.
> It describes the topic of the sentence, what the focus of the sentence is
> on, and a sentence (or at least a well-written one) can't have two
> focuses.*
>
> In your examples, {nepwI''e' chaH verengan'e'} and {nutojta' nepwI''e'
> chaHbogh verengan'e'}, which is more important to emphasize as the topic of
> the sentence: that the people you're talking about are liars, or that
> they're Ferengi? Pick one, and build your sentence accordingly.
>
> I enjoy asking questions about the weird possibilities of Klingon grammar
> as much as the next person, assuming that the next person really enjoys it.
> (I've got some questions on the prefix trick...) But after a while you have
> to realize that you're probably not opening up productive new avenues of
> linguistic innovation, you're just trying to convince yourself that
> nonsense isn't nonsense. At best, you're just coming up with new kinds of
> {chIch pabHa'ghach} "intentional ungrammaticality", like using prefixless
> {tu'lu'} with plural objects, or using an adverbial with a nominalized
> verb. We don't really have a context for using intentional ungrammaticality
> very often on the mailing list.
>
> * I do wonder about sentences of the form {X verbbogh Y'e' ghaH Z'e'},
> where the {-'e'} is used as a pronoun-copula subject marker AND as a
> relative-clause head-noun marker. My suspicion is that it's probably okay,
> because the first {-'e'} marks the topic of the relative clause while the
> second marks the topic of the main clause, but there's no examples I'm
> aware of.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
--94eb2c119c2a979ba40559014401
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">nIqolay Q:</span></div><span style=3D"font-family:sans-s=
erif;font-size:13.696px">> But after a while you have to realize that yo=
u're probably not > opening up productive new avenues of linguistic =
innovation, > you're just trying to convince yourself that nonsense =
isn't=C2=A0</span><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-ser=
if;font-size:13.696px">> nonsense.=C2=A0</span></div><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-serif;font-size:13.696px">=
One thing which truly amazes me on this list, is how some people are always=
ready to judge others with regards to the questions they choose to ask.</s=
pan></div><div dir=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"><sp=
an style=3D"font-size:13.696px">Has anyone here appointed himself as the kl=
ingon-police, who will examine the quality of other people's questions =
and pass judgement as far as their motives for asking are concerned ?</span=
></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span style=3D"fo=
nt-size:13.696px"><br></span></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"s=
ans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13.696px">Either you like it or not, di=
fferent things will concern different people, and each person will require =
assistance with regards to the obstacles he has encountered.</span></font><=
/div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:1=
3.696px"><br></span></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif=
"><span style=3D"font-size:13.696px">When I ask something, I am not asking =
in order to just post a question. I ask because I have come across an obsta=
cle.</span></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><span s=
tyle=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">Or do I need to exp=
lain myself each time I ask something ?=C2=A0</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">So relax. Noone is defiling your immaculate klingon=
grammar.</span></font></div><div dir=3D"auto"><font face=3D"sans-serif"><s=
pan 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 12, 2017 8:01 PM, "nIqolay Q" <<a href=3D"mailto:niqol=
ay0@gmail.com">niqolay0@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px =
#ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><d=
iv class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:26 PM, 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_quot=
e" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204)=
;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">I agree 100% with the analysis provide=
d by lieven.<div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">So, if I understa=
nd correctly:</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Yes, we ca=
n have the construction {b'e' 'oH a'e'}.</div><div dir=
=3D"auto">Yes, we can have the construction {yadda yadda yadda b'e'=
'oHbogh 'a'e'}.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=
=3D"auto">If I understand wrong, then do correct me.</div></div></blockquot=
e><div><br></div><div>How did you get that understanding from the examples =
people have posted? No one else here has used a sentence with two {-'e&=
#39;} suffixes; most of the discussion has been about word order and findin=
g clearer ways to rephrase your sentences. The {-'e'} suffix is a t=
opic marker. It has the same meaning=20
in the {X 'oH Y'e'} construction as it does in any other senten=
ce. It describes the topic of the=20
sentence, what the focus of the sentence is on, and a sentence (or at least=
a well-written one) can't have two focuses.* <br></div><div><br></div>=
<div>In your examples, {nepwI''e' chaH verengan'e'} and=
<span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif"> {nutojta' nepwI''e'=
chaHbogh verengan'e'}, which is more important to emphasize as the=
topic of the sentence: that the people you're talking about are liars,=
or that they're Ferengi? Pick one, and build your sentence accordingly=
.</span></div><div><div><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif"><br></span><=
/div><div><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif">I enjoy asking questions a=
bout the weird possibilities of Klingon grammar as much as the next person,=
assuming that the next person really enjoys it. (I've got some questio=
ns on the prefix trick...) But after a while you have to realize that you&#=
39;re probably not opening up productive new avenues of linguistic innovati=
on, you're just trying to convince yourself that nonsense isn't non=
sense. At best, you're just coming up with new kinds of {chIch pabHa=
9;ghach} "intentional ungrammaticality", like using prefixless {t=
u'lu'} with plural objects, or using an adverbial with a nominalize=
d verb. We don't really have a context for using intentional ungrammati=
cality very often on the mailing list.<br></span></div><div><span style=3D"=
font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-family:sa=
ns-serif"></span>* I do wonder about sentences of the form {X verbbogh Y=
9;e' ghaH Z'e'}, where the {-'e'} is used as a pronoun-=
copula subject marker AND as a relative-clause head-noun marker. My suspici=
on is that it's probably okay, because the first {-'e'} marks t=
he topic of the relative clause while the second marks the topic of the mai=
n clause, but there's no examples I'm aware of.<br></div></div></di=
v></div></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>
--94eb2c119c2a979ba40559014401--
--===============1990632397719949816==
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
--===============1990632397719949816==--
