[tlhIngan Hol] Beginner's text and questions

[Will Martin]

I remember an explanation that SuStel made many years ago that while {-be’} is a rover and it negates what it follows, more accurately, it negates EVERYTHING before it, not singularly the suffix or root verb that it follows. In the instance in question back then, it worked to negate the combination of the verb and the adverbial that preceded it. I think this was over “If you don’t eat your vegetables, {batlh bIHeghbe’}” It doesn’t mean “You will honorably not die.” I means “You will not die honorably."

So, that pretty much erases that distinction in meaning that you are trying to make between {tu’be’lu’} and {tu’lu’be’}, since “no one observes” and “one does not observe” are pretty much synonymous. 

In particular, remember that {tu’lu’} does NOT mean “Someone unspecified observes (while someone else does not)”. It’s meaning is much more close to the English “One observes”. {naDev tlhInganpu’ tu’lu’} (and yes, the missing {lu-} is okay with plenty of canon to confirm it) means “There are Klingons here,” or “One observes Klingons here.” It most definitely does NOT mean “Somebody observes Klingons here and I’m not telling you who it is doing the observing, or identifying those who is not doing the observing."

So, trying to figure out when it is right to say {tu’lu’be’} and wrong to say {tu’be’lu’} or vise versa is likely to be a frustrating exercise, because it already fundamentally doesn’t mean what you have suggested that it means. This is a thing that is arbitrary. Po-tay-to/Po-tah-to.

It would be interesting to see how Okrand would translate “The Undiscovered Country”.

As a stylistic thing, I’d probably choose {X tu’lu’be’} to mean that there are no Xs, since {tu’lu’} is pretty much fossilized as “There is an X or there are Xs”, while {tu’be’lu’} breaks the fossilized form, suggesting the more literal translation that one doesn’t observe or discover it, so I’d translate “The Undiscovered Country” as  {Sep tu’be’lu’bogh}. There is a country, so {Sep tu’lu’be’bogh} kinda suggests that there isn’t a country, so it doesn’t work as well for a translation, In My Humble Opinion.

But that’s just me. I could be totally wrong.

pItlh

charghwI’ ‘utlh
(ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)




> On Feb 16, 2022, at 4:10 PM, Ed Bailey <bellerophon.modeler at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> That's an interesting question. The difference in the canon examples is that -be' follows tu' when -jaj or -'a' is appended. I would expect the difference to be that tu'be'lu' means that someone unspecified does not observe (though someone else might), while tu'lu'be' would mean no one observes, but {yIH tu'be'lu'jaj} doesn't follow this pattern.
> 
> cha'DIch, Soj wa'DIch vIqel: Luis, it was all clear to me except for the last sentence, which evidently I am misinterpreting: "Small deeds of all citizens and important thing(s) are responsible."
> 
> ~mIp'av
> 
> On Wednesday, February 16, 2022, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > yIn nI' yISIQ 'ej yIchep
> > Live long and prosper! (RT)
> 
> Did 'oqranD write this?
> 
> voragh:
> > Finally note the difference between {tu’be’lu’} : 
> > and {tu’lu’be’} :
> 
> What's the difference? Is there any conclusion to be made from the Ca'Non examples posted? Because I don't see any difference regarding the when each variation is to be used.
> 
> --
> Dana'an 
> https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ <https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/>
> Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20220216/25dafb73/attachment-0015.htm>