[83915] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Topic (was: Specifying distance traveled)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Doq)
Thu Jan 10 09:02:36 2008
From: Doq <doq@embarqmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <478571DA.5050102@trimboli.name>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 09:01:05 -0500
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
I think the real issue here is that significant members of the Klingon
speaking community appear to lack anything close to a consensus on how
to effectively use the noun suffix {-'e'} in any way except on a noun
following a pronoun in a "to be" sentence. In every other suggested
use here, SOMEBODY objects and starts a mini-lecture about how NOT to
use {-'e'}.
Meanwhile NOBODY has suggested anything that everybody else accepts. I
don't think there is any other area of Klingon grammar that is quite
this ineffective in terms of offering people a way to say something
that everyone else can agree is correctly stated.
I think my use of {-'e'} is correct. You think your use of {-'e'} is
correct. Pretty much everybody seems to think they know how it should
be used, but when any of us use it, somebody jumps in and an argument
ensues. Rarely does anybody finally agree, beyond objectors giving up
on answering yet another insistence that a particular use really is
justifiable.
What I'd like is if you, or anyone else who thinks they really
understand what Okrand was after, and how Okrand's canon use of it
matches that understanding, could show us how we can confidently use
it to express things in a way that any reasonable Klingon speaker
(assuming that there are any) can agree is correct usage. Success in
that mission would serve this community much more than just more
objections to any particular usage.
It would also be much more time consuming and challenging. Cheap shots
are quick, easy and unproductive.
I've tried to explain my usage, providing multiple examples and
descriptions. I was apparently mistaken in my usage. I would
appreciate it if someone else would take the risk I took to the degree
that I took it to try to clarify the usage. I haven't seen that yet.
I'd like it if someone tried to do this as a positive contribution to
our group understanding of the issue, rather than as a typically
bombastic critique, trying to stylishly prove that any dissenting
opinions are held by obvious idiots. I doubt there are any idiots
here, though we often treat each other as if we were.
I know that's a challenge for many of us. Please try to stretch
yourself to meet the challenge.
Thank you for your patience.
Doq
On Jan 9, 2008, at 8:16 PM, David Trimboli wrote:
> Doq wrote:
>> I did not intend to be hostile. I did intend to challenge you, since
>> you were so generous in your challenges to me without offering any
>> positive example of how {-'e'} should be used, since you considered
>> my
>> examples of {-'e'} to be erroneous.
>>
>> I can't say I'm impressed with your single example, since you
>> basically used it in apposition with a pronoun in the sentence.
>> That's
>> a baby step away from using it on a noun following a pronoun used as
>> the verb "to be". If that's all we can do with {-'e'}, then it is not
>> very useful, indeed.
>>
>> I wish you would offer a more extensive lesson in the use of {-'e'}
>> so
>> that I and others can learn how to use it well, since I'm apparently
>> using it so poorly.
>
> Lesson? I'm no more of an authority than you are. Your tone has
> changed
> and suggests you're upset with what you think is a holier-than-thou
> attitude on my part. That is not my intention or attitude. You're free
> to agree or disagree with me as you like. There is no single,
> absolutely
> correct answer here.
>
> I'm sorry you don't like my example, but that's EXACTLY what -'e' is
> for
> — marking a topic. You're right about it being similar to the topic
> marker on a "to be" sentence — thus my earlier insistence that that
> isn't just an arbitrary rule: the topic of a "to be" sentence REALLY
> IS
> a topic.
>
> And it IS useful... for marking topics. (And emphasizing non-topic
> nouns.) That's all it ever claimed to do. That's why you can't do with
> it what you're trying to do. You're using -'e' as a
> relationship-I-don't-have-a-suffix-for-but-really-want-to-add suffix,
> and it isn't one.
>
> By the way: everything I write is my opinion. I am not endowed with
> the
> Gift of Fact. I just don't care to write "I think" and "in my humble
> opinion" everywhere. As we all learn in grade school, such locutions
> are
> in poor style. Naturally, we're all expression our opinions. When
> something comes down to me from on high, I'll document the source
> properly and let everyone know.
>
> SuStel
> Stardate 8024.7
>
> --
> Practice the Klingon language on the tlhIngan Hol MUSH.
> http://trimboli.name/klingon/mush.html
>
>
>
