[112307] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] If only we could use twice to say..
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID)
Thu Mar 21 00:12:42 2019
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CABSTb1daE=A_Rzcku7CQmxWk+6_Cr2dg3vgKS3yoVvziZkByKw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 05:12:25 +0100
To: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============4029887439767113785==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d643d1058492f267"
--000000000000d643d1058492f267
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 03:30, Ed Bailey <bellerophon.modeler@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:02 PM De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> There's no implication that the fee being doubled means anything other
>> than that you pay double the amount for the same service.
>>
>
> This was my point. The thing being doubled, *qav'ap*, is the amount to be
> paid, not the thing being paid for. Therefore, the object of *DIl* in *ghajwI'vaD
> qav'ap le' yIDIl* is still the amount paid, not the thing being paid for.
>
The thing being doubled, {qav'ap} (the rent, or rental fee), is not what
one would normally think of as being "paid for" *in English*, because
English distinguishes between paying "for" some things versus paying (no
"for") other things (typically a debt, bill, or fee). Actually, English is
inconsistent because you *can* say "pay for" rent or a fee in some
contexts, such as "I'll pay [for] your rent", "I pay [for] my children's
phone bills", "I pay $500 [for] rent", but you normally say "I pay rent"
instead of "I pay for rent" (unless it's in a context like "I pay for rent
and you pay for utilities").
In Klingon, {DIl} appears to be the verb one uses for both paying for
something (to obtain it) and paying (for) a debt, bill, or fee. The object
of {DIl} is the *reason* you're paying. It's just that English adds the
preposition "for" in some cases but not others. What you pay out is then
the object of {nob}. In *Klingon*, one "pays for" ({DIl}) the rent, just as
one "pays for" food.
When Okrand wrote the English definition of {DIl}, he was being succinct in
defining it as "pay for". That just means that the subject is paying, and
the object is the reason for the payment. It doesn't mean that {DIl} is
used exactly in those situations in English where "for" is used with "pay"
and not otherwise, which English is somewhat inconsistent about.
> AFAIK, those definitions were not provided in the game, but is someone's
>> guess at what the word means. (That guess may well be right, but they go
>> beyond what's actually necessary to explain the usage in the game.) The
>> game itself is consistent in using "rent" for {qav'ap} and {nob} as the
>> verb to pay out an amount: {qav'ap DIl}, but {vaghmaH QaS nob}. It *may* be
>> that you could say {vaghmaH QaS DIl} to say "pay out 50 troops" (rather
>> than "pay for 50 troops"), but that is not how it's used in the game. In
>> the game, you {DIl} a {qav'ap} by {nob}ing some amount of {QaS}.
>>
>
> But here you make a good point that convinces me not to use *DIl* to mean
> "pay (money)." Klingon apparently makes a distinction between price as a
> specified amount, like *wa''uy' DarSeq*, and price as the idea of an
> amount demanded, requested, offered, or agreed upon, called *qav'ap*.
>
I think you're making this more complicated than it has to be. The object
of {DIl} is the reason you're paying something (whether it's an amount or
not), and the object of {nob} is the thing you're giving out (whether it's
an amount or not). You *can* state an amount as the object of {DIl}, but it
would mean that you're "paying for" that amount (i.e., you're paying in
order to obtain that amount).
{vaghmaH QaS vIDIlmeH Duj vInob} "in order to pay for 50 troops, I give a
ship", "I pay a ship for 50 troops", seems to me to be a pretty clear
sentence with no confusion as to what I'm paying out and what reason I'm
paying (what I'm paying for),
{qav'ap vIDIlmeH wa' 'uy' DarSeq vInob} "I pay one million darseks for rent"
{wa' 'uy' DarSeq vIDIlmeH qav'ap vInob} "I pay the fee [cost, price, value,
or whatever {qav'ap} means] for one million darseks". That is, I'm
purchasing one million darseks, and I'm paying out an unspecified {qav'ap},
perhaps a billion Federation credits (or whatever the exchange rate is).
I don't think the distinction you're drawing between a fee in the abstract
and a specific amount is justified or necessitated by how {DIl} has been
used in canon.
> You can equate the two by saying something like *wa''uy' DarSeq 'oH
> qav'ap'e'* "The price is one million darseks" but, as you point out, you
> still *nob* the specified amount when you *DIl* the price (as the idea of
> the amount agreed upon) or when you *DIl* the thing you're buying. I
> expect *ghogh'ot* "bill" is also something you *DIl*.
>
{ghogh'ot}, {rup}, {qav'ap} and even {mab} would be things I expect are
typical objects of {DIl}. This is despite the fact that in English, you
typically say "pay a bill" or "pay a fine" (not "pay for a bill" or "pay
for a fine").
> This distinction also appears in English, somewhat differently. With
> "price" as its object, "give" can mean either "pay" or "propose," depending
> on context and wording: "I gave him the price he asked." "If you want this
> car, I'll give you a good price."
>
Right. In Klingon, this sense of "give" cannot be {nob} and would have to
be something like {chup}.
--
De'vID
--000000000000d643d1058492f267
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 03:30, Ed Bail=
ey <<a href=3D"mailto:bellerophon.modeler@gmail.com">bellerophon.modeler=
@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding=
-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 7:02 P=
M De'vID <<a href=3D"mailto:de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com" target=3D"_blan=
k">de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quot=
e"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;bord=
er-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>There's no implic=
ation that the fee being doubled means anything other than that you pay dou=
ble the amount for the same service.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br=
></div><div>This was my point. The thing being doubled,=C2=A0<b>qav'ap<=
/b>,=C2=A0is the amount to be paid, not the thing being paid for.=C2=A0Ther=
efore, the object of=C2=A0<b>DIl</b>=C2=A0in=C2=A0<b>ghajwI'vaD qav'=
;ap le' yIDIl</b>=C2=A0is still the amount paid, not the thing being pa=
id for.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>The thing being d=
oubled, {qav'ap} (the rent, or rental fee), is not what one would norma=
lly think of as being "paid for" *in English*, because English di=
stinguishes between paying "for" some things versus paying (no &q=
uot;for") other things (typically a debt, bill, or fee). Actually, Eng=
lish is inconsistent because you *can* say "pay for" rent or a fe=
e in some contexts, such as "I'll pay [for] your rent", "=
;I pay [for] my children's phone bills", "I pay $500 [for] re=
nt", but you normally say "I pay rent" instead of "I pa=
y for rent" (unless it's in a context like "I pay for rent an=
d you pay for utilities").</div><div><br></div><div>In Klingon, {DIl} =
appears to be the verb one uses for both paying for something (to obtain it=
) and paying (for) a debt, bill, or fee. The object of {DIl} is the *reason=
* you're paying. It's just that English adds the preposition "=
for" in some cases but not others. What you pay out is then the object=
of {nob}. In *Klingon*, one "pays for" ({DIl}) the rent, just as=
one "pays for" food.</div><div><br></div><div>When Okrand wrote =
the English definition of {DIl}, he was being succinct in defining it as &q=
uot;pay for". That just means that the subject is paying, and the obje=
ct is the reason for the payment. It doesn't mean that {DIl} is used ex=
actly in those situations in English where "for" is used with &qu=
ot;pay" and not otherwise, which English is somewhat inconsistent abou=
t.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><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"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>=C2=A0A=
FAIK, those definitions were not provided in the game, but is someone's=
guess at what the word means. (That guess may well be right, but they go b=
eyond what's actually necessary to explain the usage in the game.) The =
game itself is consistent in using "rent" for {qav'ap} and {n=
ob} as the verb to pay out an amount: {qav'ap DIl}, but {vaghmaH QaS no=
b}. It *may* be that you could say {vaghmaH QaS DIl} to say "pay out 5=
0 troops" (rather than "pay for 50 troops"), but that is not=
how it's used in the game. In the game, you {DIl} a {qav'ap} by {n=
ob}ing some amount of {QaS}.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><=
div>But here you make a good point that convinces me not to use <b>DIl</b> =
to mean "pay (money)." Klingon apparently makes a distinction bet=
ween price as a specified amount, like <b>wa''uy' DarSeq</b>, a=
nd price as the idea of an amount demanded, requested, offered, or agreed u=
pon, called <b>qav'ap</b>. </div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></di=
v><div>I think you're making this more complicated than it has to be. T=
he object of {DIl} is the reason you're paying something (whether it=
9;s an amount or not), and the object of {nob} is the thing you're givi=
ng out (whether it's an amount or not). You *can* state an amount as th=
e object of {DIl}, but it would mean that you're "paying for"=
that amount (i.e., you're paying in order to obtain that amount).</div=
><div><br></div><div>{vaghmaH QaS vIDIlmeH Duj vInob} "in order to pay=
for 50 troops, I give a ship", "I pay a ship for 50 troops"=
, seems to me to be a pretty clear sentence with no confusion as to what I&=
#39;m paying out and what reason I'm paying (what I'm paying for),<=
/div><div><br></div><div>{qav'ap vIDIlmeH wa' 'uy' DarSeq v=
Inob} "I pay one million darseks for rent"</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>{wa' 'uy' DarSeq vIDIlmeH qav'ap vInob} "I pay the =
fee [cost, price, value, or whatever {qav'ap} means] for one million da=
rseks". That is, I'm purchasing one million darseks, and I'm p=
aying out an unspecified {qav'ap}, perhaps a billion Federation credits=
(or whatever the exchange rate is).</div><div><br></div><div>I don't t=
hink the distinction you're drawing between a fee in the abstract and a=
specific amount is justified or necessitated by how {DIl} has been used in=
canon.</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:=
1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>You can equate=C2=A0t=
he two by saying something like=C2=A0<b>wa''uy' DarSeq 'oH =
qav'ap'e'</b>=C2=A0"The price is one million darseks"=
but, as you point out, you still <b>nob</b> the specified amount when you =
<b>DIl</b> the price (as the idea of the amount agreed upon) or when you=C2=
=A0<b>DIl</b> the thing you're buying. I expect=C2=A0<b>ghogh'ot</b=
>=C2=A0"bill" is also something you=C2=A0<b>DIl</b>.</div></div><=
/div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>{ghogh'ot}, {rup}, {qav'ap} a=
nd even {mab} would be things I expect are typical objects of {DIl}. This i=
s despite the fact that in English, you typically say "pay a bill"=
; or "pay a fine" (not "pay for a bill" or "pay fo=
r a fine").</div><div>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padd=
ing-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div>This distinc=
tion also appears in English, somewhat differently. With "price" =
as its object, "give" can mean either "pay" or "pr=
opose," depending on context and wording: "I gave him the price h=
e asked." "If you want this car, I'll give you a good price.&=
quot;</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><div><br></div>Right. In Klingon, this sense of "gi=
ve" cannot be {nob} and would have to be something like {chup}.<br cle=
ar=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_signature"=
>De'vID</div></div>
--000000000000d643d1058492f267--
--===============4029887439767113785==
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
--===============4029887439767113785==--
