subject of the verb which refers to the verb of a net sao
According to tkd: ---------- When the verb of the second sentence has a third-person subject (that is, the pronominal prefix is 0) but the intended meaning is <one> or <someone,> rather than <he, she, it,> or <they,> {net} is used instead of {'e'.} {qama'pu' DIHoH net Sov} <One knows we kill prisoners.> As above, the first sentence here is {qama'pu' DIHoH} <We kill prisoners.> The second sentence is {net Sov} <One knows that.> The full construction implies that it is common knowledge that the group to which the speaker belongs kills prisoners. {Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej} <One certainly finds it useful for the mission.> The first part of this example is {Qu'vaD lI'} <It is useful for the mission> ({Qu'vaD} <for the mission,> {lI'} <it is useful>). The second part is {net tu'bej} <One certainly finds that> or <One certainly observes that.> The full construction might also be translated <One will certainly observe that it is useful to the mission.> Note that although the word <will> makes a more flowing translation, there is nothing in the Klingon sentence indicating future tense. ---------- Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong". There are two options: maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'. maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc. Which of the two would be the correct choice? ~ Dana'an remain klingon
Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong".
There are two options:
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'.
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc.
Given these two options, I would go with the first; using an indefinite subject and then immediately following it up with a reference to that subject “smells” off to me, even if I can’t necessarily say that it’s wrong. It's like you're actively avoiding talking about a person, but then you have a reference to the person as though you were just talking about them. That being said, I would probably not use an indefinite subject here at all; if I intend to refer to the same person twice in quick succession, I would give define them in some way in the first instance. Most likely, I'd use {vay'}, although something like {nuv} or {ghot} would also work. {maw' ghawran 'e' Harchugh vay', vaj muj [nuvvam/ghotvam/].} If you need to be very specific, you can use {HarwI'}. //loghaD ________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 5, 2021 2:04:10 PM To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list Subject: [tlhIngan Hol] subject of the verb which refers to the verb of a net sao According to tkd: ---------- When the verb of the second sentence has a third-person subject (that is, the pronominal prefix is 0) but the intended meaning is <one> or <someone,> rather than <he, she, it,> or <they,> {net} is used instead of {'e'.} {qama'pu' DIHoH net Sov} <One knows we kill prisoners.> As above, the first sentence here is {qama'pu' DIHoH} <We kill prisoners.> The second sentence is {net Sov} <One knows that.> The full construction implies that it is common knowledge that the group to which the speaker belongs kills prisoners. {Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej} <One certainly finds it useful for the mission.> The first part of this example is {Qu'vaD lI'} <It is useful for the mission> ({Qu'vaD} <for the mission,> {lI'} <it is useful>). The second part is {net tu'bej} <One certainly finds that> or <One certainly observes that.> The full construction might also be translated <One will certainly observe that it is useful to the mission.> Note that although the word <will> makes a more flowing translation, there is nothing in the Klingon sentence indicating future tense. ---------- Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong". There are two options: maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'. maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc. Which of the two would be the correct choice? ~ Dana'an remain klingon
On 3/5/2021 8:19 AM, Felix Malmenbeck wrote:
Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong".
There are two options:
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'.
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc.
Given these two options, I would go with the first; using an indefinite subject and then immediately following it up with a reference to that subject “smells” off to me, even if I can’t necessarily say that it’s wrong.
It's like you're actively avoiding talking about a person, but then you have a reference to the person as though you were just talking about them.
Right. *vay'vam* presumes that there's a *vay'* in the first place, and an indefinite subject is not the same as *vay'.* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Mar 5, 2021, at 8:04 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong".
There are two options:
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'.
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc.
Which of the two would be the correct choice?
I agree with Felix. The subject in this idea is not indefinite. Say Harchugh vay'. — ghunchu'wI'
I have all kinds of problems with this. The if/then doesn’t convey to me that the indefinite person who thinks Gawron is crazy is wrong. It conveys to me that if, yes, there is someone who believes that Gawron is wrong, then somebody is wrong, but if nobody thinks that Gawron is crazy, then nobody is wrong (so I guess that means that everybody is right). maw’be’ba’ ghawran. Qoch ‘Iv? [Bare teeth, put hand on hilt of disrupter, and look around.] charghwI’ ‘utlh (ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)
On Mar 5, 2021, at 8:04 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
According to tkd:
----------
When the verb of the second sentence has a third-person subject (that is, the pronominal prefix is 0) but the intended meaning is <one> or <someone,> rather than <he, she, it,> or <they,> {net} is used instead of {'e'.} {qama'pu' DIHoH net Sov} <One knows we kill prisoners.> As above, the first sentence here is {qama'pu' DIHoH} <We kill prisoners.> The second sentence is {net Sov} <One knows that.> The full construction implies that it is common knowledge that the group to which the speaker belongs kills prisoners. {Qu'vaD lI' net tu'bej} <One certainly finds it useful for the mission.> The first part of this example is {Qu'vaD lI'} <It is useful for the mission> ({Qu'vaD} <for the mission,> {lI'} <it is useful>). The second part is {net tu'bej} <One certainly finds that> or <One certainly observes that.> The full construction might also be translated <One will certainly observe that it is useful to the mission.> Note that although the word <will> makes a more flowing translation, there is nothing in the Klingon sentence indicating future tense.
----------
Suppose we want to say: "if someone believes gowron is crazy, he's wrong".
There are two options:
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj mujlu'.
maw' ghawran net Harchugh, vaj muj vay'vam/nuvvam/ghotvam/etc.
Which of the two would be the correct choice?
~ Dana'an remain klingon _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
participants (5)
-
Felix Malmenbeck -
ghunchu'wI' 'utlh -
mayqel qunen'oS -
SuStel -
Will Martin