[tlhIngan Hol] A thought on the irrealis construction

[mayqel qunenoS]

ok, now I understand your opinion on this subject.

If we approach this from a cultural perspective, then I agree, that when it
comes to warriors (martok, gowron, etc), then the use of irrealis would be
very limited, perhaps maybe even non-existent.

As you described -and I agree-, a warrior wouldn't concern himself with
alternate possibilities, or what "might have been in the past or future".

However, I believe there is an additional side to this matter.

We tend to think klingons as being only warriors. And of course, noone
would disagree that every klingon regardless of gender and perhaps maybe
even age, would definitely be able to fight.

But I feel it is almost certain, that there must be scientists too. Someone
must have built their birds of prey, right ?

So, I think that although the irrealis wouldn't be of much use to a
warrior, it surely would be necessary to a scientist, who constantly needs
to describe possibilities, theories etc.

Of course, since there is a lot we don't know about this warrior race, one
can only speculate.

However, being terrans who are fascinated by their language, I think the
more grammar/linguistic tools we have, the better.

I'm happy beyond words, that maltz revealed this construction for us ! I
truly feel kahless himself answered my prayers, since many times I wanted
to use irrealis but I didn't know how to do it.

thank you maltz !

qunnoH
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 6 Nov 2016 6:19 pm, "Ed Bailey" <bellerophon.modeler at gmail.com> wrote:

> jIjatlh
>
>> > 'a pa'logh qeltaHvIS, qaSbe'bogh wanI' qelbe'.
>> > qellaHbe'law'.
>>
> jang qunnoq, jatlh
>
>> If I understand the klingon sentence correctly (and if I don't, then
>> please correct me) it says: "however, the past while it is considering, it
>> doesn't consider events which didn't happen. seemingly it isn't able to
>> consider them".
>>
>> I think, it is perfectly able to consider events which didn't happen in
>> the past. Check this out:
>>
>> "If I hadn't closed the door yesterday, the cat would have been able to
>> enter the house"
>>
>> the above in klingon:
>>
>> {wa'Hu' lojmIt vISoQmoHta'; vISoQbe'moHta' net jalchugh vaj juH 'ellaH
>> vIghro'}.
>> "yesterday I closed the door; if one imagines I hadn't closed it,then the
>> cat would have been able to enter the house".
>>
>> anyway, if you disagree at anything of the above, I would love to hear
>> your thoughts.
>>
> I was talking about plural Klingons as I recall, so I should have said
> pa'logh luqeltaHvIS.
>
> I'm pretty sure {tuch} <future> and {pa'logh} <past> are not merely time
> stamps, so it's perfectly possible to say "They consider the future" or
> "the past." (For that matter, I think even a time stamp like {wa'leS} might
> be used in such a way, as in DaHjaj bIHIj 'e' Dalay'! yapbe' wa'leS!) In
> fact, {pIq} and {ret} are the time stamps you'd use, maybe with {'op} or
> {Hoch}, to say "in the future" or "in the past."
>
> I haven't seen much usage of these new words, {tuch} and {pa'logh}, as in,
> let me suggest, {pa'loghmo' ghojbe'chugh vay', pa'logh qaSqa'moH 'e'
> botlaHbe'}.
>
> But Klingon does have what might be considered a deficiency by Terrans who
> are used to using the subjunctive mood, particularly the contrary-to-fact
> subjunctive. Klingon handles the other subjunctive (I'm not sure what it's
> called in English, but it's called Konjunktiv I in German), as in "Long
> live the Queen!" or "Be he live or be he dead," quite well with {-jaj} and
> {-chugh}. Your example using the wording De'vID suggested does a good job
> of discussing a formerly possible event which did not occur. Stating that
> something could happen but didn't might also cover some situations, as in
> {poStaH lojmIt 'e' bong vIchaw', vaj juH 'ellaHpu' vIghro' 'a not 'el}.
>
> But my point is that for Klingons, it's not a deficiency that Klingon
> doesn't have the sort of grammatical apparatus seen in "If I were rich."
> Not just because there are workarounds, but also because it's not something
> they feel the need to say. Based on my knowledge of Star Trek, I have the
> very strong impression that, unlike humans, Klingons don't give a damn
> about stuff that doesn't happen. Martok said it as one who discovered this
> difference between the two species from the other side.
>
> ~mIp'av
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20161106/94e289b0/attachment-0017.htm>