[tlhIngan Hol] veb and vorgh canon examples

[nIqolay Q]

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:56 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> bIlugh nIqolay Q.
>
> However, there is a reason which led to this thread in the first place.
>
> In the past, when I was writing in klingon, I used to do something like
> this:
>
> {ghu' veb vIQIjmeH QInvam vIghItlh}
> In order to explain the next situation, I'm writing this message.
>
> And by saying "next situation", I meant the situation which I was about to
> explain in the next paragraph.
>
> Until one day ghunchu'wI' wrote, that both {veb} and {vorgh} are meant to
> be used only with regards to items which exist in a row/list/succession.
> So, without a "previous situation", I can't write "next situation".
>
> Because of this reason, I wanted to read the canon examples, in order to
> confirm this.
>

There's no canon explicitly related to this particular issue specifically.
But knowing that {veb} and {vorgh} refer to lists, series, and things in
succession can help understand where ghunchu'wI' is coming from. In the
phrase "the next situation", the implied series is not a series of
situations -- you aren't going through a list of situations and discussing
them one by one. Rather, the implied series is the list of topics discussed
in the text, and "next" refers to the next topic, which happens to be a
situation. In this case, using {veb} to mean "be discussed next in this
text" is a shortcut based on the English usage, and avoiding unnecessary
Englishisms is considered good practice.

There's no word for "topic" or "paragraph" or "be discussed next in this
text" yet, though I think you can get the same basic idea with something
like {ghu''e' Delbogh mu'tlheghmey veb} "situation that the next sentences
describe". (Since a message is implicitly a series of sentences, I think
using {veb} would be uncontroversial here, or at least less so than using
it with {ghu'}.)

Something like {tugh ghu' vIDelbogh} "situation that I will describe soon"
might also work, although this does get into the issue of whether
timestamps can be used metaphorically to refer to the timeline of reading
through a text. Actually, I have a couple questions about concepts of time
and succession as they relate to written texts... guess I should write a
{chabal tetlh} for the next qep'a'.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170825/31b7d403/attachment-0016.htm>