[1674] in tlhIngan-Hol
Archaic Syntax ??
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Oct 14 00:39:51 1993
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.east.sun.com>
From: DSTRADER@delphi.com
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.east.sun.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1993 00:35:00 -0400 (EDT)
X-Vms-To: IN%"tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.east.sun.com"
Yesterday I heard something about how Okrand made a fuss about pointing
out to us that in all phrases using -jaj ('IwlIj jachjaj) the subject
appears first. In phrases that have passed down from centuries ago,
this may be so; maybe old Klingon syntax put the verb last. Could it
have been Obj.-Subj.-Vb.?
I've been thinking about this (unfortunately I had erased the message
containing this info along with all other _apparently_ unimportant ones.
) I have checked out TKD and found both examples using -jaj in the
addendum where it is introduced have no evidence for this-- they have
objects (i.e., noun objects, not ones indicated by the prefix) but
nothing says or implies, the subject of a verb with -jaj precedes the
verb... HOWEVER---- At the very end of the Intro to the Addendum,
Okrand writes {taHjaj boq}, "may the alliance continue." Yeah, I know
what you're thinking. Which one is correct?! CK is loaded with grammatical
blunders by even Okrand himself. On the other hand, he did make a big
deal about putting the subject first in a -jaj phrase. Until there is
more concrete evidence, I'm going to remain open-minded about the whole
thing. What we seem to need now more than anything is a third edition
TKD to bring together all this new information that KLI and other new
sources have bombarded us with.
!@#$%^&*(Guido1)*&^%$#@!
