<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/18/2021 10:18 AM, Will Martin
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:25DE8440-07F5-4E53-91C7-1F681CB7E489@mac.com">Also, I
appreciate the insight into the use of {-‘e’} on the last noun in
{X ‘oH Y’e’} sentences. {tlhIngan ghaH Qanqor’e’} does get it’s
“Krankor is a Klingon” translation through the mechanism of
“Krankor is the topic of the sentence, 'He is a Klingon.’”
Translation compresses the latter into the former. We are talking
about Krankor when we say, “He is a Klingon."</blockquote>
<p>Well, yes, but I wouldn't call this insight on my part: it's
explained fairly explicitly in TKD when the topic (ahem) is
introduced.<br>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p><b>puqpu' chaH qama'pu''e'</b><i> The prisoners are children.</i><br>
<b>pa'DajDaq ghaHtaH la''e'</b><i> The commander is in his
quarters.</i></p>
<p>These sentences might also be translated <i>As for the
prisoners, they are children; As for the commander, he is in
his quarters.</i></p>
<p><i><br>
</i></p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:25DE8440-07F5-4E53-91C7-1F681CB7E489@mac.com">
<div class="">Okrand was trying to work out the mechanics of a
language with no verb for “to be”, and came up with two
mechanics. One is to imply “to be” in all the adjectival or
stative verbs.</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I wouldn't look at it this way. In English it is required to use
<i>be</i> to assign an adjective to a subject as the main thrust
of a sentence; Klingon does away with this middleman and just
makes all qualities equal to other verbs. You "do" <b>Quch</b>
just as much as you "do" <b>qet.</b> To mentally insert a <i>be</i>
every time you see a verb of quality is to think in English or
some similar language. When I see <b>Quch tlhIngan,</b> I think <i>A
Klingon <b>Quch</b>es.</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:25DE8440-07F5-4E53-91C7-1F681CB7E489@mac.com">
<div class=""> The other is to use pronouns as both subject and
verb, like {tlhIngan ghaH.} Meanwhile, in “Krankor is a
Klingon,” you have this additional noun. What do you do with
THAT?</div>
</blockquote>
<p>I consider the idea that the pronoun "acts" as the verb to be a
simplification of what's really going on, to explain the grammar
to an English speaker who can't conceive of a complete sentence
without a verb (i.e., the intended audience of the book). In
Klingon, a copula links either a noun with a pronoun or two nouns.
Saying <b>tlhIngan ghaH</b> is to say <b>tlhIngan = ghaH:</b>
you're explicitly setting the antecedent for your pronoun. You can
use verb suffixes on the pronoun because you're allowed to modify
that equals sign to better reflect the identity: is the identity
continuous? negative? relative? interrogative?<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:25DE8440-07F5-4E53-91C7-1F681CB7E489@mac.com">
<div class="">So, he made the subject noun the Topic of the
sentence, and instead of placing this extra noun more like other
{-‘e’} marked topics at the beginning of the sentence, which
would have made it {Qanqor’e’ tlhIngan ghaH},</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Except for <b>qIbDaq SuvwI''e' SoH Dun law' Hoch Dun puS </b>and
"fronted" sentences like <b>HaqwI''e' DaH yISam,</b> he has never
done this. The former is a comparative or superlative and may not
operate on the rules of basic sentences. The latter specifically
explains that the marked noun is the object, so it's not a case of
a free-floating topic noun (and Okrand has said fronting this way
is marked and wouldn't be done regularly). So except for special
cases, he has never used a free-floating topic noun. I have
serious doubts whether they're used by Klingons.</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:25DE8440-07F5-4E53-91C7-1F681CB7E489@mac.com">
<div class="">Note that {Qanqor’e’ tlhIngan ghaH,} doesn’t break
any rules and would effectively have the same meaning as
{tlhIngan ghaH Qanqor’e’.} Likely, it’s a valid expression,
though through habit and convention, Klingons always order the
words {tlhIngan ghaH Qanqor’e’.} Using the unconventional word
order wouldn’t be technically wrong, but at the least it would
be “highly marked” suggesting that you don’t speak the language
very well.</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Correct. <b>Qanqor'e' tlhIngan ghaH</b> may not break any rules,
but it's obviously not the right way to say this. I could imagine
this to be another case of fronting. A bit of punctuation would
make the use-case clearer:<b> </b>Imagine a scene where Rich
pulls off his rubber forehead and reveals that he's got a real
Klingon forehead underneath. Everyone is stunned, and someone says
<b>Qanqor'e'! tlhIngan ghaH!</b> <i>Krankor! He's a Klingon! </i>In
any case, just because you can imagine a way it might be said
doesn't mean it's now open season on the grammar.</p>
<p>I mean, there's nothing actually <i>wrong</i> with speaking like
Yoda, and everyone will understand you, but that doesn't mean you
want to emulate it for anything other than speaking like Yoda.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>