We all know that {bIjeghchugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear in battle, and {bIje'chugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear when entering a store on Qo'noS, but what about {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}? It seems like a reasonable thing a restaurant proprietor might tell you, and is also more self-evidently true than the other two. I tried doing a web search for {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}, and wasn’t able to find any existing uses of this phrase. However, Klingon text searches in Terran database systems can be a bit hit or miss. Surely others must have invented this same pun already, I would think… At the very least, it makes for an amusing demonstration of how important the {qaghwI'} is.
Oh, I left out a crucial {be'} in those three phrases. I meant {bIje''eghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh}. I guess {bIje'be''eghchugh} would be more grammatically appropriate, but it sounds less like the other phrases.
On Jun 11, 2018, at 17:40, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
We all know that {bIjeghchugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear in battle, and {bIje'chugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear when entering a store on Qo'noS, but what about {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}? It seems like a reasonable thing a restaurant proprietor might tell you, and is also more self-evidently true than the other two.
I tried doing a web search for {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}, and wasn’t able to find any existing uses of this phrase. However, Klingon text searches in Terran database systems can be a bit hit or miss. Surely others must have invented this same pun already, I would think…
At the very least, it makes for an amusing demonstration of how important the {qaghwI'} is. _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
{bIje'be''eghchugh} sounds really clunky to my ear, though that's just my opinon. There is plenty of canon support (which I'm too lazy to look up) for {-be'} modifying not just the preceding suffix but the whole unit of meaning, so {bIje''eghbe'chugh} would most naturally be understood as "If you don't feed yourself". I keep trying to formulate an alternative meaning, where {-be'} negates only the {-'egh}, but I can't find a way to make any sense of it. pagh ________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 3:43 PM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh Oh, I left out a crucial {be'} in those three phrases. I meant {bIje''eghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh}. I guess {bIje'be''eghchugh} would be more grammatically appropriate, but it sounds less like the other phrases.
On Jun 11, 2018, at 17:40, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
We all know that {bIjeghchugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear in battle, and {bIje'chugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear when entering a store on Qo'noS, but what about {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}? It seems like a reasonable thing a restaurant proprietor might tell you, and is also more self-evidently true than the other two.
I tried doing a web search for {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}, and wasn’t able to find any existing uses of this phrase. However, Klingon text searches in Terran database systems can be a bit hit or miss. Surely others must have invented this same pun already, I would think…
At the very least, it makes for an amusing demonstration of how important the {qaghwI'} is. _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.o...
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.o...
On Jun 11, 2018, at 18:43, RE Andeen <eric.andeen@outlook.com> wrote:
{bIje'be''eghchugh} sounds really clunky to my ear, though that's just my opinon. There is plenty of canon support (which I'm too lazy to look up) for {-be'} modifying not just the preceding suffix but the whole unit of meaning, so {bIje''eghbe'chugh} would most naturally be understood as "If you don't feed yourself". I keep trying to formulate an alternative meaning, where {-be'} negates only the {-'egh}, but I can't find a way to make any sense of it.
“If you don’t feed yourself (but do feed others)”, which still leaves the statement as a whole true. Put on your own mask before assisting others. I agree that putting the be' before the 'egh sounds a bit clunky now that you point it out.
pagh
From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 3:43 PM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh
Oh, I left out a crucial {be'} in those three phrases. I meant {bIje''eghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh}. I guess {bIje'be''eghchugh} would be more grammatically appropriate, but it sounds less like the other phrases.
On Jun 11, 2018, at 17:40, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:
We all know that {bIjeghchugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear in battle, and {bIje'chugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear when entering a store on Qo'noS, but what about {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}? It seems like a reasonable thing a restaurant proprietor might tell you, and is also more self-evidently true than the other two.
I tried doing a web search for {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}, and wasn’t able to find any existing uses of this phrase. However, Klingon text searches in Terran database systems can be a bit hit or miss. Surely others must have invented this same pun already, I would think…
At the very least, it makes for an amusing demonstration of how important the {qaghwI'} is. _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.o...
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.o... _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
The way the reflexive (type 1) suffixes work is that they take a verb with a subject and then say that the object is the same as the subject. If you could negate only the reflexive suffix, not the verb-suffix combination, then how, exactly, is the object of the verb supposed to work, exactly? Take {je'}, for example: jIje' – I feed (some unspecified person/animal/object). Maybe it makes me feel good to provide food for people – {jIje' 'e' vItIv}. Unspecified object. vIje' – I feed it/them. puqpu'wI' vIje' – I feed my children. Specified object (possibly only specified by the prefix, but still specified). jIje''egh – I feed myself. Specified reflexive object. jIje''eghbe' – I feed (some unspecified person/animal/object) but not myself? You now have an unspecified object, with the qualification that it’s NOT reflexive. I don’t think that’s a supportable interpretation, especially when the more straightforward “I don’t feed myself” jumps out as the obvious meaning. pagh From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> Reply-To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Date: Monday, June 11, 2018 at 4:47 PM To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh On Jun 11, 2018, at 18:43, RE Andeen <eric.andeen@outlook.com<mailto:eric.andeen@outlook.com>> wrote: {bIje'be''eghchugh} sounds really clunky to my ear, though that's just my opinon. There is plenty of canon support (which I'm too lazy to look up) for {-be'} modifying not just the preceding suffix but the whole unit of meaning, so {bIje''eghbe'chugh} would most naturally be understood as "If you don't feed yourself". I keep trying to formulate an alternative meaning, where {-be'} negates only the {-'egh}, but I can't find a way to make any sense of it. “If you don’t feed yourself (but do feed others)”, which still leaves the statement as a whole true. Put on your own mask before assisting others. I agree that putting the be' before the 'egh sounds a bit clunky now that you point it out. pagh ________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org<mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org>> on behalf of Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net<mailto:daniel@dadap.net>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 3:43 PM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org<mailto:tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh Oh, I left out a crucial {be'} in those three phrases. I meant {bIje''eghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh}. I guess {bIje'be''eghchugh} would be more grammatically appropriate, but it sounds less like the other phrases.
On Jun 11, 2018, at 17:40, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net<mailto:daniel@dadap.net>> wrote:
We all know that {bIjeghchugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear in battle, and {bIje'chugh vaj bIHegh} is something you might hear when entering a store on Qo'noS, but what about {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}? It seems like a reasonable thing a restaurant proprietor might tell you, and is also more self-evidently true than the other two.
I tried doing a web search for {bIje''eghchugh vaj bIHegh}, and wasn’t able to find any existing uses of this phrase. However, Klingon text searches in Terran database systems can be a bit hit or miss. Surely others must have invented this same pun already, I would think…
At the very least, it makes for an amusing demonstration of how important the {qaghwI'} is. _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org<mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org> https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Ftlhingan-hol-kli.org&data=02%7C01%7C%7C37d705e7ad9848e34ea408d5cfecba7a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636643538001474265&sdata=QDWGahJrJ2K3WIS2P0j9Hq%2B%2FtZO0q1R43dZ3guRAQ6w%3D&reserved=0<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Feur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flists.kli.org%252Flistinfo.cgi%252Ftlhingan-hol-kli.org%26data%3D02%257C01%257C%257C37d705e7ad9848e34ea408d5cfecba7a%257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%257C1%257C0%257C636643538001474265%26sdata%3DQDWGahJrJ2K3WIS2P0j9Hq%252B%252FtZO0q1R43dZ3guRAQ6w%253D%26reserved%3D0&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf684eb81acf4436e221008d5cff5a3b8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636643576268716803&sdata=wBJjK43IenEdX4xuPiyad9jmspdcEdI7UeMHqdNj9Lc%3D&reserved=0>
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org<mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org> https://eur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Ftlhingan-hol-kli.org&data=02%7C01%7C%7C37d705e7ad9848e34ea408d5cfecba7a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636643538001474265&sdata=QDWGahJrJ2K3WIS2P0j9Hq%2B%2FtZO0q1R43dZ3guRAQ6w%3D&reserved=0<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Feur04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flists.kli.org%252Flistinfo.cgi%252Ftlhingan-hol-kli.org%26data%3D02%257C01%257C%257C37d705e7ad9848e34ea408d5cfecba7a%257C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%257C1%257C0%257C636643538001474265%26sdata%3DQDWGahJrJ2K3WIS2P0j9Hq%252B%252FtZO0q1R43dZ3guRAQ6w%253D%26reserved%3D0&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf684eb81acf4436e221008d5cff5a3b8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636643576268716803&sdata=wBJjK43IenEdX4xuPiyad9jmspdcEdI7UeMHqdNj9Lc%3D&reserved=0> _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org<mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.kli.org%2Flistinfo.cgi%2Ftlhingan-hol-kli.org&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cf684eb81acf4436e221008d5cff5a3b8%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636643576268716803&sdata=BLyeKkHKuJB5FIyHS1porwDmzCz3iGwEQ2Jwoa4JJyA%3D&reserved=0>
On Jun 11, 2018, at 19:15, RE Andeen <eric.andeen@outlook.com> wrote:
The way the reflexive (type 1) suffixes work is that they take a verb with a subject and then say that the object is the same as the subject. If you could negate only the reflexive suffix, not the verb-suffix combination, then how, exactly, is the object of the verb supposed to work, exactly?
Oh, that’s a really good point. I hadn’t considered that negating the reflexive suffix leaves the verb with no object, since the type one suffixes need to take no object prefixes. {bIje''eghbe'chugh} it is, then. I guess third person subject and object combinations that take the zero prefix might leave open the possibility of “others but not self” with -'eghbe', but given that this interpretation is expressly not possible with any combination that takes an explicit prefix, I would imagine such an interpretation would be unnatural to the point of not being useful.
participants (2)
-
Daniel Dadap -
RE Andeen