[838] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: too many meanings for `'e'`?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Wed May 12 23:44:08 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
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Mark_Nudelman@go.com
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: 10 May 93 17:25
Someone writes (PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: sign your messages!)
> Uses of 'e' in Fri 7 May's email have again brought to my attention the
>somewhat confusing apparent variety of uses for 'e'. As well as these three
>that I noticed before, e.g. qama''e' = :-
> (a) "the prisoner who/which", i.e. as relative clause antecedent.
> (b) "<that> prisoner", i.e. not some other prisoner.
> (c) "the <prisoner>", i.e. not the warder or the maintenance man.
I'm not sure I see a big problem here. Usage (a) is clearly
distinguished from the others as it occurs in a relative clause.
I suppose there is no easy way to say "the prisoner who hit
the *officer*", making the officer the topic, but I'm not sure
there's much use for such a construct. I'm not clear on what
you mean by usage (b); I would say "qama'vetlh" for "that
prisoner". Where have you seen 'e' used in this way?
> The examples in TKD 3.3.5 `lujpu' jIh'e'` = "<I> failed", and `De''e'` = the
><information>, are certainly type (c). But in 6.3 `puqpu' chaH qama'pu''e'` =
>"the prisoners are children", which he translates as "As for the prisoners,
>they are children", implying that the 'e' is again type (c), there seems to be
>a fourth meaning of 'e' creeping in:
> (d) X qama''e' = "the prisoner which is a/the X" not "the X's prisoner",
I view the use of 'e' in sentences expressing the sense of "to be"
as a mere idiom, or grammatical construct. The formula is
"X pronoun Y'e'" = "Y is an X". The translation Okrand
gives "As for the prisoners, they are children" I think is merely
intended to be suggestive as to why 'e' is used in this way. I
don't think this use conflicts with its use as a topic marker.
In any case, if Klingon were a language constructed from logical
principles, what you say would certainly be valid. But as a natural
language, it is replete with ambiguity, as is any natural language.
The apparent ambiguity of 'e' is not so serious I think, since the
sense is generally clear from context. Look at the literally dozens
of uses of such English words as "of", "to", or "about".
--nachHegh
Mark_Nudelman@go.com
