De'vID :
Question words (in this case, nuq "what?") function the same way pronouns do in questions with "to be" in the English translations.
This means that the {'Iv} and {nuq} don't mean just "who" or "what", but their actual meaning is "who is" and "what is" ? De'vID :
Thus, the question yIH nuq? "What is a tribble?" is exactly parallel the statement yIH 'oH "It is a tribble" (where yIH is "tribble" and 'oH is "it"). The answer to the question yIH nuq? ("What is a tribble?") would presumably be a definition or description of a tribble.]
1. I can't understand this sentence : "Thus, the question yIH nuq? "What is a tribble?" is exactly parallel the statement yIH 'oH "It is a tribble". 2. {yIH nuq} and {nuq yIH} are the same, and they mean "what is a tribble" right ? 3. How do I ask "who is a/the tribble?" De'vID :
{'Iv ghaH} - the expected answer to this is a sentence of the form {X ghaH}, e.g., {Duy ghaH}. {ghaH 'Iv} - the expected answer to this is a definition or description of "him". {Duy ghaH} is an acceptable answer, but you might also answer {qepvammo' DIvI'vaD SutlhmeH naDev ngeHpu' DIvI'} or something that describes the person.
1. So, {'Iv ghaH} and {ghaH 'Iv} are the same, and they mean "what is he" ? But then why don't we use {nuq} ? 2. If I want to ask "who is he", do I use {'Iv ghaH}, {ghaH 'Iv}, or can I use both ? This is by far the single most confusing part of klingon I have encountered, from the first day I started studying it. On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:13 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 23 June 2016 at 11:49, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
DevID:
the answer to {'Iv SoH} should take the form {X SoH} (and not {X jIH}). {SoH 'Iv} avoids this problem.
I can't understand this. Why when someone asks me {'Iv SoH}, I can't reply saying {mayqel jIH}, and be consistent with the TKD ?
I would be placing the answer {mayqel} at the place of the {'Iv} and I would have replaced -necessarily- the {SoH}, with {jIH}. Is this replacement, the point you're trying to make ?
TKD 6.4 says: [For {'Iv} "who?" and {nuq} "what?" the question word fits into the sentence in the position that would be occupied by the answer.]
Strictly speaking, if you want to be some kind of TKD-literalist, to form the answer to a question with {'Iv} or {nuq}, you take the question and just replace the question word with the answer.
Obviously, if I ask you {'Iv SoH}, the correct answer isn't {mayqel SoH}.
Do you mean, that by using {SoH 'Iv} and replying {mayqel jIH}, the replacement matter is overcome, because the answer doesn't just replace the {'Iv} of the {'Iv SoH} (if we had used it), but employs a different word order altogether ?
It employs a different _rule_ altogether.
But if that's the case, then the {SoH 'Iv}, not only it doesn't address any matter at all, but it contradicts the rule that "the {'Iv} takes the place of the answer in a sentence", since the answer {mayqel jIH}, doesn't just replace the {'Iv} but changes the word order altogether.
No, you're not getting that there are _two different rules_ in operation here.
From http://klingonska.org/canon/1996-12-12b-news.txt: [Question words (in this case, nuq "what?") function the same way pronouns do in questions with "to be" in the English translations. Thus, the question yIH nuq? "What is a tribble?" is exactly parallel the statement yIH 'oH "It is a tribble" (where yIH is "tribble" and 'oH is "it"). The answer to the question yIH nuq? ("What is a tribble?") would presumably be a definition or description of a tribble.]
When {'Iv} is used as a pronoun in a question with "to be" in the English translation, the expected answer to a question like {SoH 'Iv} is a definition or description of {SoH} "you".
You're trying to invent a rule that allows you to put the question word either at the front or back of a question, when in fact there are two _different_ rules for asking (subtly) different types of questions.
{'Iv ghaH} - the expected answer to this is a sentence of the form {X ghaH}, e.g., {Duy ghaH}. {ghaH 'Iv} - the expected answer to this is a definition or description of "him". {Duy ghaH} is an acceptable answer, but you might also answer {qepvammo' DIvI'vaD SutlhmeH naDev ngeHpu' DIvI'} or something that describes the person.
I suspect in practice the questions are really interchangeable and the explanation in TKD 6.4 isn't so strictly followed when the pronoun is {jIH}, {SoH}, etc. (i.e., a pronoun that requires a change in the answer).
This whole matter resembles quick sand ; the more I try to understand, the deeper I get..
What _practical_ thing are you actually confused about? Is there something you want to say but don't know how?
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org