<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">I think that SuStel has stated my position more clearly than I have. My point is that if a Klingon Replacement Proverb is a poor candidate to base an argument for an exceptional case of interpreting how a Klingon comparative works.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">We have examples of the “scope” of stuff preceding a Klingon comparative encompassing the entire comparative. We have one case of two of these contexts preceding the two halves of a Klingon comparative, where the “scope” of each context is the half of the comparative that it precedes. Then we have this one example, which is somewhat cryptic where one is tempted to imagine that the “scope” of the context only applies to the first half of the comparative.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">That’s a really weak argument for the idea that it’s generally okay to provide context exclusively for the first half of a comparative and not provide any contrasting context for the second half. It may be the case that this is true, but it very much falls short of providing justification for broad generalization.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">At the very best, it could be interpreted as a poorly stated comparative that could have been easily improved by adding some kind of context-providing stuff before the second half of the comparative to make it clear that the previous context doesn’t apply to the second half, but even this is a stretch because it assumes an accurate translation of a Replacement Proverb that we don’t really understand all that well.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I don’t think we should look at that specific example and mimic it a lot, assuring ourselves that “See? This is how Okrand does it, so it must be perfectly fine to do it this way,” especially when it would be remarkably clearer if we didn’t, and the difference is so slight.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Maybe Okrand will make this clearer someday, but as they say in Rohan, “This is not that day."</div><br class=""><div class="">
<div style="caret-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;">charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan<br class=""><br class="">rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.</div>
</div>
<div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Feb 16, 2021, at 11:08 AM, SuStel <<a href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" class="">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/16/2021 10:39 AM, De'vID wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CA+7zAmOfmLsD1insi8hX04EX1qbM3=tcNup7gu7mZo13soLx6g@mail.gmail.com" class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, 16 Feb 2021 at 16:18,
SuStel <<a href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">
<div class="">I think you're both assuming too much. You're assuming
the expression cannot be analyzed in the normal way.
De'vID is assuming that the English translation accurately
reflects the meaning of the Klingon proverb. I don't think
either position is clearly supportable. The Klingon
sentence is odd, the English translation is odd, and no
Klingon has explained it further.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">I'll readily admit that I don't know what the English
translation actually means. But I think *some* interpretation of
the English translation has to accurately reflect the meaning of
the Klingon proverb (assuming Dr. Okrand didn't completely mess
up here). </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">There's no reason to believe that the *grammar* of
Replacement Proverbs is any different than normal sentences, is
there? (Contrast this with toasts, for which we're told
explicitly that they follow different grammatical rules.) </div>
</blockquote><p class="">I see no reason why the grammar of replacement proverbs would be
any different than normal sentences. I'm not the one arguing that.
I'm just not assuming that the English translation is necessarily
all that close to the meaning of the Klingon.</p><p class="">Okrand often translates loosely, especially on the two language
tapes. I think some examination of sticky sentences like this is
warranted, but we should not rely too heavily on the English
translation to tell us exactly what's happening when we encounter
strange grammar. Especially when the grammar comes from the
language tapes, which are riddled with errors. In the real world,
this may just have been a bad English-to-Klingon translation.<br class="">
</p><p class="">Sometimes it's enough to say, "Hmm, isn't that interesting?" and
move on. I think this is one of those times.<br class="">
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name/">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org" class="">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a><br class="">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>