[99534] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] this / that as subject
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com)
Wed Sep 24 16:58:36 2014
From: lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <CA+cwSm9cVcqqjwGDuUxeZTb+UYrYV5pDLbS40wEq4Or8RyDf-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 16:58:16 -0400
To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
Please note that {SoH} is not listed as a noun in TKD. It is a pronoun. A p=
ronoun is categorized as chuvmey. You can use it in a sentence in place of =
a noun and you can use it as a verb. Meanwhile, it is neither a noun nor a =
verb, so you should not start out with the idea of experimentally putting e=
very kind of noun and/or verb suffix on it and then subtract the ones that =
don't make sense. =
You should start out with the idea of not using any suffixes of any type on=
a pronoun, except where you are explicitly told that you can. Any suffix o=
n a pronoun is exceptional, and while exceptions are valid, remember that t=
hey are exceptions. We know you can use {-taH} on a pronoun while it is act=
ing as a verb. We have examples in canon. There are a lot more suffixes NOT=
shown to be used with pronouns than ones that ARE shown, and likely there =
is very little need of expanding the vocabulary of suffixes placed on prono=
uns.
We should start out looking for examples in canon of other suffixes on pron=
ouns, and for the most part, steer clear of creative use of previously unse=
en suffix use on pronouns.
For the most part, I see pronouns used as the verb "to be" much more often =
than I see it used as a noun. Typically, use of it as a noun is redundant t=
o the verb prefix, and Klingons don't tend to waste a lot of syllables on g=
rammatical redundancy. They don't even consistently use the plural suffix i=
f context suggests the noun is plural. How many other languages do THAT?
And if you used {-wI'}, how would you know whether it was being used as a n=
oun suffix or a verb suffix?
I really think it's better to have something to say and work at saying it i=
n Klingon than it is to look at a word type and try to yank it every which =
way when you don't need it to say anything.
Children learn language on a need to know basis. Why don't you?
That's not intended as an insult or a challenge. It's simple advice. You'll=
get better faster if you simply write stuff you want to say.
On Sep 24, 2014, at 2:44 PM, Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 September 2014 16:41, Brad Wilson <bmacliam@aol.com> wrote:
>> Which then raises the question, is Type 5 the "only" noun suffix allowed=
on
>> pronouns? Using {SoHHom} would either elicit a confused look or a punch =
in
>> the face. And Type 4 possessives hardly seem useful - {SoHwI' ?!?}.
> =
> Nor do type 2 plurals ({chaHpu'}?? {SoHpu'}??).
> =
> Type 3 suffixes might occasionally be useful, though: {nuqDaq ghaH
> HoD'e'? -- ghaHHey vIlegh.} =93Where=92s the captain? -- Well, I see
> someone someone and I think it=92s the captain, but I=92m not sure it=92s
> really he.=94
> =
> Or if someone talks about killing a spy who had impersonated a friend,
> perhaps they might say, {SoHqoq qaHoHpu'} =93I killed the so-called
> you=94. (Or would that be {SoHqoq vIHoHpu'}?)
> =
> nuq 'oH vuDraj'e'?
> =
> Philip
> =
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
