[98548] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Canon for answering negative questions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Mon May 5 09:20:39 2014
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 09:20:19 -0400
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmPt6kB0dEd0vUiw_ZyvSpuh60VTPCL6Hw4nrVAXGT7qFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 5/5/2014 8:58 AM, De'vID wrote:
> I think the question is easily misinterpreted only by English
> speakers. Of course, almost all Klingon speakers are native English
> speakers, so most Klingon speakers will probably find it ambiguous the
> way that you do.
It's not a matter of being a native English-speaker. Language rules
aren't always logical rules, and in the case of English answering a
"negative question" doesn't follow strict logical reasoning.
Is the man not qualified?
Yes, he is not qualified.
No, he is not qualified.
Both are valid answers and mean the same thing. This is why people are
calling it ambiguous in English.
What Robyn wants to know is, does Klingon treat yes/no questions the
same way English does, or does it treat them with a strictly logical
analysis? Unfortunately, we don't know the answer to that.
It's interesting to consider this: in English, the question gets
answered yes or no depending on whether the listener interpreted the
question as "is he not-qualified" (yes) or "is-not he qualified" (no,
where "is-not" sort of means "is, but I don't think so"). Klingon can't
be misunderstood this way because it combines the "is-not" with the
"not-qualified" into a single word, "not-is-qualified." This doesn't
solve the original question, but it may shed some light on why the
question exists.
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
