[tlhIngan Hol] Explicit pronouns again

[SuStel]

On 10/11/2020 10:10 AM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
>
> <<<
> Pronouns may be used as nouns, but only for emphasis or added clarity.
> They are not required. Thus, the following sets of sentences are all
> grammatically correct.
>
>     {yaS vIlegh jIH} "I see the officers."
>     {yaS vIlegh}
> >>>
>
> Taking this literally, adding the suffix {-'e'} even adds more emphasis.
> It is used with the pronoun jIH, because it cannot be attached to a verb. 

The suffix *-'e'* does more than add even more emphasis. It adds focus. 
It makes the noun to which it is attached exclusive.

Notice the examples in TKD (correcting for forgotten prefix):

*jIlujpu' jIH*/I have failed.
/*jIlujpu' jIH'e'*/I, and only I, have failed./

*De' vItlhapnISpu'*/I needed to get the information.
/*De''e' vItlhapnISpu'*/I needed to get the INFORMATION. It was the 
information (and not something else) that I needed./

Notice that *jIlujpu' jIH* does not exhibit any kind of emphasis.

There are also examples of explicit pronouns in section 6.1:

*puq vIlegh jIH*/I see the child.
/*jIH mulegh puq*/The child sees me.
/

Okrand goes on to say that explicit pronouns can "as here, be used for 
emphasis." The emphasis of the above two sentences is merely the 
emphasis of making it clear to the reader which pronoun is the correct 
subject or object. There is no semantic significance to including the 
pronouns on these sentences. *puq vIlegh jIH*//doesn't mean /*I* see the 
child,/ with some kind of emphasis on the /I./ It means simply /I see 
the child,/ and I'm making it quite explicit what the subject of the 
sentence is.

In other words, explicit pronouns don't MEAN anything special in the 
sentence. They are just used when you want to be as clear as possible. 
Maybe to disambiguate. Maybe because your audience isn't very good at 
Klingon yet. Maybe because you're speaking very slowly and carefully to 
get someone's attention.

In an interview with Lawrence Schoen in 1995, Lawrence pointed out that 
Okrand's use of *-'e'* was focus, not topic, despite what it says in 
TKD, and Okrand accepted this correction. 
http://klingonska.org/canon/1995-06-holqed-04-2-a.txt

The trouble is just that Okrand used the vague word /emphasis/ for 
multiple different phenomena without explanation. The examples given, 
however, make the difference clear. *-'e'* on a subject or object give 
the noun grammatical focus. Plain explicit pronouns only provide clarity 
without changing the meaning of the sentence.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20201011/d3c74c29/attachment-0016.htm>