[90509] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Beginner Story: nuq bop bom 'ay''a' wej
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Wiechu)
Sat Nov 5 17:22:56 2011
In-Reply-To: <F7364959-1B23-4A60-92DA-775156FDE64C@gmail.com>
From: Wiechu <ddanecki@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 22:22:17 +0100
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============6235326298397736731==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174761eec8b71004b1036bd0
--0015174761eec8b71004b1036bd0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
tuQaHpu' 'e' Hoch Satlho'qu'. vIqaw 'e' vInID. vIghojqu'ta' vIneH 'ej
vIyajqu'ta' vIneH.
--
Sincerely,
Daniel Danecki (Wiechu)
2011/11/5 lojmIt tI'wI' nuv <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
> I'm with ghunchu'wI' and Sustel on this one.
>
> The most awkward part of dealing with the Klingon language is that Marc
> Okrand, THE authority on the language... has not really spoken it all that
> well for most of the history of the language. There are a lot of mistakes.
> Most of the time, his examples are of good Klingon, but the number of
> errors comes close to the number of insightful, new bits about the language
> that he gives us. Many of the mistakes become canon and we have to treat
> them like they aren't mistakes.
>
> Ever wonder why {neH} doesn't take {'e'} like all the other verbs used in
> Sentence-As-Object constructions? Ever wonder why the second verb in
> Sentence-As-Object constructions never takes a Type 7 suffix? These rules
> are based on errors Okrand noticed that he had made after they became
> canon. The rules make his errors in those cases the correct way to speak
> Klingon. But Okrand never made it a rule that you shouldn't use {lu-} in
> {lutu'lu'}. He just goofed and didn't catch it. It happens. Deal with it.
>
> In general, we have to decide what to politely ignore and what to take
> seriously. On this particular issue (Do we use {lutu'lu'} when the direct
> object is plural?), we've been through this a bunch of times. The consensus
> tends to be, that the right way to say it is {lutu'lu'}, but forgetting the
> opening {lu-} is a common, tolerable mistake.
>
> Think of it as "ain't" vs. "isn't". While I know it isn't right, I ain't
> giving you a hard time if you say it wrong. That doesn't make your error
> the correct way to say it. {lutu'lu'} simply is the right way to say it.
> It's not old-fashioned and on its way out. It's not a hypercorrection. It
> is the gold standard. If you wish to speak proper Klingon, don't forget the
> {lu-}.
>
> If you screw up and omit the {lu-}, nobody is going to give you a hard
> time about it. There is no {lu-} for he X, she X, it X, they X, he X him,
> he X her, he X it, he X them, she X him, she X her, she X it, she X them,
> it X him, it X her, it X it, it X them, but there is a {lu-} for they X
> him, they X her, and they X it. It's the easiest part of the prefix chart
> to get wrong. We all do it at some point in our learning the language. Even
> Okrand.
>
> But being a common error doesn't make it right. It especially does not
> make it preferable.
>
> lojmIt tI'wI' nuv
> lojmIttI7wI7nuv@gmail.com
>
>
>
> On Nov 5, 2011, at 11:12 AM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
>
> On Nov 5, 2011, at 4:40 AM, Wiechu <ddanecki@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> However in light of this, how do you explain example from TKD 4.2.5
> { naDev puqpu' tu'lu' } ?
>
>
> *I* explain it as an error.
>
> There are other obvious errors in TKD, including {lujpu' jIH} on page 29
> and {yIHaghqu'} "study him/her well" on page 48.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
--0015174761eec8b71004b1036bd0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
tuQaHpu' 'e' Hoch Satlho'qu'. vIqaw 'e' vInID. =
vIghojqu'ta' vIneH 'ej vIyajqu'ta' vIneH.=A0<div><br></=
div><div><span style=3D"border-collapse:collapse;color:rgb(136, 136, 136)">=
--<br>
Sincerely,<br><br>Daniel Danecki (Wiechu)</span><br>
<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">2011/11/5 lojmIt tI'wI' nuv <spa=
n dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com">lojmitti7wi7=
nuv@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"=
margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word"><div>I'm with ghunchu'wI' a=
nd Sustel on this one.</div><div><br></div><div>The most awkward part of de=
aling with the Klingon language is that Marc Okrand, THE authority on the l=
anguage... has not really spoken it all that well for most of the history o=
f the language. There are a lot of mistakes. Most of the time, his examples=
are of good Klingon, but the number of errors comes close to the number of=
insightful, new bits about the language that he gives us. Many of the mist=
akes become canon and we have to treat them like they aren't mistakes.<=
/div>
<div><br></div><div>Ever wonder why {neH} doesn't take {'e'} li=
ke all the other verbs used in Sentence-As-Object constructions? Ever wonde=
r why the second verb in Sentence-As-Object constructions never takes a Typ=
e 7 suffix? These rules are based on errors Okrand noticed that he had made=
after they became canon. The rules make his errors in those cases the corr=
ect way to speak Klingon. But Okrand never made it a rule that you shouldn&=
#39;t use {lu-} in {lutu'lu'}. He just goofed and didn't catch =
it. It happens. Deal with it.</div>
<div><br></div><div>In general, we have to decide what to politely ignore a=
nd what to take seriously. On this particular issue (Do we use {lutu'lu=
'} when the direct object is plural?), we've been through this a bu=
nch of times. The consensus tends to be, that the right way to say it is {l=
utu'lu'}, but forgetting the opening {lu-} is a common, tolerable m=
istake.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Think of it as "ain't" vs. "isn'=
t". While I know it isn't right, I ain't giving you a hard tim=
e if you say it wrong. That doesn't make your error the correct way to =
say it. {lutu'lu'} simply is the right way to say it. It's not =
old-fashioned and on its way out. It's not a hypercorrection. It is the=
gold standard. If you wish to speak proper Klingon, don't forget the {=
lu-}.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If you screw up and omit the {lu-}, nobody is going to =
give you a hard time about it. There is no {lu-} for he X, she X, it X, the=
y X, he X him, he X her, he X it, he X them, she X him, she X her, she X it=
, she X them, it X him, it X her, it X it, it X them, but there is a {lu-} =
for they X him, they X her, and they X it. It's the easiest part of the=
prefix chart to get wrong. We all do it at some point in our learning the =
language. Even Okrand.</div>
<div><br></div><div>But being a common error doesn't make it right. It =
especially does not make it preferable.</div><br><font color=3D"#888888"><d=
iv>
<span style=3D"border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0, 0, 0);font-family:Helv=
etica;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spaci=
ng:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:auto;text-indent:0px;text-transform=
:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><div>
lojmIt tI'wI' nuv</div><div><a href=3D"mailto:lojmIttI7wI7nuv@gmail=
.com" target=3D"_blank">lojmIttI7wI7nuv@gmail.com</a></div><div><br></div><=
/span><br>
</div>
<br></font><div><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><div>On Nov 5, 2011, at 1=
1:12 AM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:</div><br></div></div><blockqu=
ote type=3D"cite"><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF=
"><div>
On Nov 5, 2011, at 4:40 AM, Wiechu <<a href=3D"mailto:ddanecki@gmail.com=
" target=3D"_blank">ddanecki@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div></d=
iv><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div><div><span>However in light of this, how =
do you explain example from TKD 4.2.5 {=A0naDev puqpu' tu'lu' }=
?</span></div>
</div></blockquote><br><div><span style=3D"color:rgb(0, 35, 163)">*I* expla=
in it as an error.</span></div><div><span style=3D"color:rgb(0, 35, 163)"><=
br></span></div><div><span style=3D"color:rgb(0, 35, 163)">There are other =
obvious errors in TKD, including {lujpu' jIH} on page 29 and {yIHaghqu&=
#39;} "study him/her well" on page 48.</span></div>
<div><span style=3D"color:rgb(0, 35, 163)"><br></span></div><div><span styl=
e=3D"color:rgb(0, 35, 163)">-- ghunchu'wI'=A0</span></div></div></d=
iv></div><div class=3D"im">_______________________________________________<=
br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org" target=3D"_blank">=
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org</a><br><a href=3D"http://stodi.digita=
lkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol" target=3D"_blank">http://stodi.=
digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a><br>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div><br>____________________________________=
___________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org">Tlhingan-hol@stodi=
.digitalkingdom.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol" t=
arget=3D"_blank">http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-=
hol</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
--0015174761eec8b71004b1036bd0--
--===============6235326298397736731==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============6235326298397736731==--
