[tlhIngan Hol] {net Sov} vs {'e' Sovlu'}
SuStel
sustel at trimboli.name
Thu Nov 30 12:34:17 PST 2017
On 11/30/2017 2:12 PM, Aurélie Demonchaux wrote:
> Today I am trying to grasp the difference between {net + verb} and
> {'e' + verb-lu'}
>
> The way I understand it is, for example with "Sov"
>
> net Sov = it is common knowledge that
> 'e' Sovlu' = someone (indefinite) knows that
>
> Thus:
> qama'pu' DIHoHbe' net Sov = It is common knowledge that we don't kill
> prisoners
> qama'pu' DIHoHbe' 'e' Sovlu' = It is known / someone knows that we
> don't kill prisoners
>
> Similarly with chaw' :
> qama'pu' DIHoH net chaw'be' = we are not allowed to kill prisoners
> qama'pu' DIHoH 'e' chaw'lu'be' = someone does not allow us to kill
> prisoners
>
> Am I getting it right ?
My first attempt to answer this never arrived.
The "common knowledge" idea was invented by Klingonists' usage; it is
not canonical. Back in the early *qep'a'mey,* it was a running gag to
say *net Sov, net Sov!* in part because Captain Krankor's imperial
anthem uses that in a line. There is no semantic difference between *net
*X and *'e'* X*lu',* except that the latter is supposed to be ungrammatical.
The rules say that, except for the recent exception with *'aq,* one uses
*net* when the subject of the second sentence is indefinite, not *'e'
*X*-lu'.* Okrand breaks this rule occasionally, and when and why one can
break the rule is unknown.
I believe he breaks the rule for the same reason I do sometimes: it's
easy to forget to use *net.* I think he does it in error. Of course, if
he ever decided to explain what's going on, he'll invent some reason why
all the examples we have of apparent rules-violations are actually
special cases, and here's what's REALLY going on, and that'll be that.
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20171130/5969d9c6/attachment-0016.htm>
More information about the tlhIngan-Hol
mailing list