[783] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: "movie"mey, etc. (was: RE: RESENT: Bounced Mail III)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri May 7 19:48:59 1993
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Captain Krankor <krankor@codex.prds.cdx.mot.com>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Fri, 7 May 93 16:46:19 -0400
'avrInvo':
>Thus the following from a recent message of trI'Qal:
>>'e'mo' not jIH chotlhIjnIS SoH!
>If the intended meaning was "You never have to apologize to me for
>that!", and assuming the "SoH" is there to make the statement
>emphatic, this should probably be more like:
>vangghachvetlhmo' not jIHvaD bItlhIjnIS SoH!
>"You never need to apologize to me because of that action!"
>("jIHvaD" because "apologize" is intransitive.)
Wrong.
"apologize" is intransitive. tlhIj is not. There is no such thing
as transative/intransitive in Klingon. chotlhIjnIS is perfectly
acceptible. This has been gone through before and I don't wish to
rehash it again. Refer to FTGD, HolQeD 2.1. Dr. Schoen, if you're
out there, PLEASE PLEASE respond to all the people who are trying to
get their hands on HolQeD! I have the article in question on line
and can forward it to anyone who is interested.
It is true that 'e'mo' is not really legal; this comes up all the
time. We would really *like* to be able to generalize on 'e', and
use it with suffixes, or in positions other than object, but as yet
we don't have sufficient evidence that this is legal. 6.2.5 is very
specific about exactly how 'e' is used, and doesn't leave much room
for interpretation. The same problem occurs later in the original
message when trI'Qal tried to use 'e' as a subject. Again, I admit
it's tempting, and I've wanted to do it many times myself, but there
just isn't enough to support it.
I remind people that, in general, it is supposed to be the
grammarian's job to correct people. If you see something important
go by that I do not address within reasonable time then, sure, speak
up, but in general the idea is not to have the list be a place where
everybody corrects everybody else. If you wish to do some
correcting, then, again, send me email (krankor@codex.com), and I'll
designate you to do a correction here and there from time to time,
as the need arrises (someone has already made such a request, I'm
just waiting for something appropriate to come by the list).
Of course, if you're determined to put others right, there is an
escape valve: List policy is that you can discuss *any* topic you
like, if you do it *in* tlhIngan Hol. {{;-)
--Krankor
