<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 9:05 AM SuStel <<a href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span>I don't think it works. This says <i>Aliens and REMANS (as
opposed to anyone else) use it.</i> <b>-'e'</b> makes a subject
or object exclusive participants in the verb, </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">I don't think this is necessarily true. which is why I suggested it. The description in TKD is just</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">This suffix emphasizes that the noun to which it is attached is the topic of the sentence. In English, this is frequently accomplished by stressing the noun (saying it emphatically) or by special syntactic constructions. <br></blockquote><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">It says nothing explicit that <b>-'e'</b> is <i>only</i> used in the sense of "X and nothing else".</div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">Some of the glosses given in TKD do include an exclusive meaning:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default"> {lujpu' jIH'e'} <I, and only I, have failed.> <br> <It is I who has failed.><br><br> {De''e' vItlhapnISpu'} <I needed to get the INFORMATION.><br> <It was the information (and not<br> something else) that I needed.> </div></blockquote><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">But there are also non-exclusive glosses listed. "I needed to get the INFORMATION" doesn't necessarily imply that I didn't need anything else, only that I'm emphasizing the information as something I need. If I needed anything else, it's not important to this sentence. Showing contrast ("X and not Y") is a common use of emphasis, and one that's easy to convey in a quick gloss, so I suspect that's why some of the examples use a "X and not something else" gloss, but I don't see a particular reason to assume that <b>-'e'</b> <i>exclusively</i> means "X and nothing else". Other examples:</div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default"><br></div></div><div><b><span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span>DaHjaj SuvwI''e' jIH</b> (TKW) <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><i>"Today I am a warrior." </i><br>The person saying this is presumably still other things (a Klingon, a person, a son/daughter, etc.), but the focus of this sentence is the fact that they're a warrior. The other things they are aren't relevant for the sentence or the context at hand.<br><br><b>qIbDaq SuvwI''e' SoH Dun law' Hoch Dun puS</b> (ST5) <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><i>"You would be the greatest warrior in the galaxy."</i><br>The grammar in this one is a little weird, since we haven't seen this kind of construction elsewhere, but there's no obvious contrastive meaning here. It's still possible for Klaa to be the best or most of some other category besides "warrior"; it's just that Vixis is talking about warriors in this sentence. "As for warriors, you would be the greatest in the galaxy."<br><br><b>reH Hegh yoHwI'pu''e'</b> (TKW) <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><i>"Always it is the brave ones who die."</i><br>The emphasis is on brave ones dying, but obviously the sentence can't mean "The brave ones (and no one else) always die." Even cowards gotta go sometime.<br><br>There's also the use of <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><b>-'e'</b> with copula sentences, which are glossed in TKD with "As for the X...", which doesn't imply exclusiveness. "As for the commander, he is in his quarters" doesn't rule out the possibility of others being in the commander's quarters. It just means that we're talking about the commander.</div><div><br></div><div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default">Another longer quote from KGT (p. 23):</div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif" class="gmail_default"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">The Morskan dialect, for example, does not put the suffix {-'e'} on the subject noun in a sentence translated with "to be" in Federation Standard (though the suffix is not missing in other contexts where it is used to focus attention on one noun rather than another within the sentence). Compare:<br> Morskan: {tera'ngan gha qama'.} ("The prisoner is a Terran.")<br> Standard: {tera'ngan ghaH qama''e'} ({tera'ngan,} "Terran"; {ghaH,} "he, she"; {qama',} "prisoner")<br> Morskan: {bIghha'Daq ghata qama'.} ("The prisoner is in the prison.")<br> Standard: {bIghHa'Daq ghaHtaH qama''e'.} ({bIghHa'Daq,} "in the prison"; {-taH,} "continuous")<br>[...]<br>{-'e'} added to {qama'} in the Morskan sentences would have its usual focusing function (the sentences would mean something like "It's the prisoner who's a Terran" and "It's the prisoner who's in the prison," respectively), the same as it would have in sentences of other types. This grammatical device is not available to speakers of {ta' Hol} who, to speak grammatically, must use {-'e'} in sentences of this type whether wishing to call extra attention to the subject noun or not.<br></blockquote><br>Nothing here implies that <b>-'e' </b>means "X and nothing else", or that the subject is an exclusive participant in the verb, only that other possible subjects are less relevant to the sentence.<br></div></div><div><br>Some uses of <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><b>-'e'</b> do have a clear "X and not something else" meaning. (<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><b>qun qon charghwI'pu''e'</b> (TKW)<span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><i> "History is written by the victors.</i><i>"</i> is probably intended to mean "Victors (and nobody else) records history.") But I think this determination has to be based on context, and isn't inherent to the <span class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"></span><b>-'e'</b> suffix.</div><div> </div></div></div>