On Fri, 29 Mar 2019 at 09:30, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 20:50, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
To get the discussion started...
(HQ 12.2:7-8): For the end of a longish enclosed space that one is typically inside of or experiences from the inside, such as a corridor, tunnel, or conduit (say, a Jeffries tube or a branch of the sewers of Paris), a different word is used: {qa'rI'}. This is the only word; it's used for both (or all) ends. The open entryway leading into such a space is called a {Din}. If there's a door there, it's referred to by the usual word for door, {lojmIt}.
How do people understand the antecedents of "there" and "it" in the last sentence? "If there's a door [[there]], [[it]]'s referred to by the usual word for door, {lojmIt}." The KLI New Klingon Words list says this:
{DIn} n. Open entryway (to corridor, tunnel, conduit, Jeffries tube, branch of sewer) [This is the open entryway of any enclosed space longer than wide in which people might find themselves. If there is a door that closes, this is not a {DIn}. It is merely a {lojmIt}.]
This seems to be an interpretation which has added something to the original. In the original, it just says "a door", not "a door that closes".
Having re-read the original definition of {DIn} given in HolQeD 12.2, I'm not convinced that the description given in the KLI New Words List is correct. Here is how I read the sentence: "If there's a door there [at the open entryway, i.e., the {DIn}], it [the door]'s referred to by the usual word for door, {lojmIt}." That is, the open entryway leading into a corridor or tunnel is called a {DIn} (regardless of whether there's a door or not), and if there's a door, the door is called by the usual word {lojmIt} (unlike in English, where there are special words like "hatch" or "gate"). That is, the fact of a door being at the entryway does not make it a "closed" entryway. It still counts as "open" because it's how you access the corridor or tunnel. If there's a tunnel which leads to a dead end, you still refer to the end which isn't a dead end as the "open" entryway, even if there's a door there. The person who wrote up the description in the KLI New Words List apparently read it differently in this way: "If there's a door there [at the end of the longish enclosed space, i.e., the {qa'rI'}], it [the entryway]'s referred to by the usual word for door, {lojmIt}." The antecedent for "it" has to be taken to be "the entryway" (rather than "the door") to arrive at the interpretation that the entryway is *not* a {DIn}, but "merely a {lojmIt}". But the previous sentence says "the open entryway", so if "it" refers to that, it still doesn't fit the interpretation. Also, taking "there" to refer to the {qa'rI'}, rather than the {DIn} in the immediately previously sentence, seems like reaching back too far. What do other people think? Or is there additional evidence that supports the interpretation given in the New Words List? -- De'vID