[86921] in tlhIngan-Hol
Prefixes not agreeing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Sun Nov 22 20:25:46 2009
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:23:25 -0500
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
In-reply-to: <249d5b950911220911u5cd335b7g38f46d46b5a30508@mail.gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Steven Lytle wrote:
> "mapum" doesn't mean 'fall'. It means "we fall" (or "we accuse"; "pum" is
> two different verbs). There is no point in losing information that is given
> in the original just because the translation is odd.
> In fact, "mapum Sor" could be interpreted as "We trees fall", although this
> use of a noun as subject with a non-third-person prefix is controversial at
> best.
At best. The utter lack of any such occurrence in Klingon, and a
grammatical sketch whose rules are at odds with the notion, make this
idea very much part of the realm of wishing. English has a convenient
sort of pronoun-noun apposition, and they people think they see a way to
reproduce it in Klingon.
I don't say "controversial" means "ungrammatical," but this practice is
based on absolutely zero evidence.
--
SuStel
tlhIngan Hol MUSH
http://trimboli.name/mush
