[tlhIngan Hol] Silly question of the day

[André Müller]

Because {-qu'} and intonational emphasis might not express the same thing.
See, we have "very" in English, but why do we need it if we can just as
well stress the adjective? Wouldn't that be very useful? Wouldn't that be
USEFUL? Wouldn't that be VERY useful? Wouldn't that be very USEFUL?
Wouldn't that be VERY USEFUL?

See what I did there? The intonation and use of "very" makes very slight
differences in meaning and, well, emphasis, so they're not always
interchangable. What exactly the difference is, can be really difficult to
determine.

One interpretation might be, that {-qu'} strengthens the meaning of the
preceding verb or suffix, e.g. «jISovbe'qu'.» = I really/absolutely don't
know it. Not a tiny little bit of it. On the other hand, the intonation (be
it louder, longer, higher pitch or whatever) might just show a contrast or
put the emphasis on that preceding suffix, e.g. «jISovBE'.» — I do NOT know
it (in contrast to what you just assumed).

This is what the difference can possibly be about, I'm not saying that it
really works exactly like that in Klingon.

Greetings from Zurich,
— André

Am Sa., 13. Okt. 2018 um 21:54 Uhr schrieb mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com
>:

> If in spoken klingon, I'm able to stress the verb suffix which I want to
> emphasize, then why the jay' would I ever need to use the -qu', after a
> suffix, while speaking ?
>
> ~ 'ISterlIng
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20181013/47c037cd/attachment-0016.htm>