Use of *-'e'* with adverbials
In this thread (http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-October/018262.html) was recently discussed how *-'e'* works, so I want to take this opportunity to ask something I've been wondering for a while. In the Addendum to TKD we find this sentence: *HaqwI''e' DaH yISam*. The translation (*Find the SURGEON now!*) makes it clear that *-'e'* works here as focus. An object with *-'e'* can precede an adverbial. But: 1. Is this position optional or mandatory? And: 2. What could be a suitable context for this sentence (focus interpretation)? 3. Since *HaqwI''e'* ends here at the beginning of the sentence, could it also be interpreted as topic? (*As for the surgeon, find her / him now!*). And if so, would the correct interpretation only depend on context? 4. At the beginning of PB, is the use of *-'e'* with *DaH tIQoy* topic? Thank you!
On 10/19/2021 9:37 AM, luis.chaparro@web.de wrote:
In this thread (http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-October/018262.html) was recently discussed how *-'e'* works, so I want to take this opportunity to ask something I've been wondering for a while.
In the Addendum to TKD we find this sentence: *HaqwI''e' DaH yISam*. The translation (*Find the SURGEON now!*) makes it clear that *-'e'* works here as focus. An object with *-'e'* can precede an adverbial. But:
1. Is this position optional or mandatory?
It appears to be optional. "The adverbial /may/ actually follow the object noun..."
And: 2. What could be a suitable context for this sentence (focus interpretation)? 3. Since *HaqwI''e'* ends here at the beginning of the sentence, could it also be interpreted as topic? (*As for the surgeon, find her / him now!*). And if so, would the correct interpretation only depend on context? 4. At the beginning of PB, is the use of *-'e'* with *DaH tIQoy* topic?
Focus and topic are related concepts, and I think this fronting of the object is taking advantage of that. This rule comes from a line in /Star Trek VI,/ where, after /Kronos 1/ has been fired upon and artificial gravity has been lost, Chancellor Gorkon commands, *chang'e' DaH Sam*/Find Chang now!/ In this context, I believe the sentence can be interpreted like so: /Chang! Find him now!/ That is, it's using the object noun as a topic instead of a focus. And separating the object from the object position might be a way to doing that. The parallel sentence in TKD gives us what seems to be a focus interpretation (*HaqwI''e' DaH yISam*/Find the SURGEON now!/), but no context is given, so it's a little hard to interpret. I think the stanza in /paq'batlh/ you're referring to is indeed doing this object-fronting. *naDev Sughompu' Suto'vo'qor wIghoSmeH ngoQmaj'e' DaH tIQoy* /Hear now, All of you here, Why we go to Sto-vo-kor./ As an aside related to past discussions, notice how Okrand has chosen to translate /Hear now, all of you here:/ *naDev Sughompu' / DaH tIQoy*///All of you have gathered / Hear now./ No trying to combine *Hoch* and *tlhIH* or mismatching prefixes or relative clauses or anything like that. // -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Thank you for your reply, SuStel.
1. Is this position optional or mandatory? It appears to be optional. "The adverbial may actually follow the object noun..."
Ok!
I think the stanza in paq'batlh you're referring to is indeed doing this object-fronting.
Sorry, but with *object-fronting* do you mean here (in the PB) topic or focus? Only to be sure if I've understood it properly (I'm taking as a reference the classification you made in this post: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-October/018287.html): a. The use in relative clauses and in copulas is clear. If not speaking about the subject or object of a relative clause or about a copula, then: b. When *-'e'* goes on a subject, it's always focus. c. When *-'e'* goes on an object which is not hanging out at the beginning of a sentence, it's focus. d. When *-'e'* goes on a noun / noun phrase which is hanging out at the beginning of a sentence, it can be topic or focus (object as focus). I've written some examples and I would be very glad to know if they are correct. Thank you for your patience! 1. paq'e' yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it - Context: We're speaking about several things, I've mentioned the book before and now I want to speak again about it and say something new about this matter (you should buy it). 2. paq'e' yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK - Context 1: You aren't sure if you should buy the book or the movie and I want to encourage you to buy the book, not the movie / Context 2: You've misunderstood me, you think I've said: *Buy the movie*, but I've meant the book, not the movie, so I repeat my sentence emphasizing *book*. 3. paq'e' DaH yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it now - Same as above with adverbial. The version *DaH paq'e' yIje'* is not possible as topic. 4. DaH paq'e' yIje', paq'e' DaH yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK now - Same as above with adverbial. 5. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy the first part (now) - Since we already have an object, *paq'e'* cannot be focus. 6. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch'e' yIje' (?) - Topic and focus (?) - As for the book, buy THE FIRST PART (now) - buy now the first part, not the second one or the complete book
Sorry, but with *object-fronting* do you mean here (in the PB) topic or focus?
I'm not sure Kingons consider there to be a difference. Call it "fopic" - it brings attention and focus to the word, whether it is acting more like what English linguists call "focus" or more like what they call "topic" and whether it appears before any adverbs, in the traditional object location, in the traditional subject location, or after a subject pronoun acting as connecting verb. For English speakers, I like to describe **-'e'** as having four uses, but I suspect that a Klingon would see it all as just the same single use applied in different situations. janSIy Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of luis.chaparro@web.de <luis.chaparro@web.de> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 10:43:58 AM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Use of *-'e'* with adverbials Thank you for your reply, SuStel.
1. Is this position optional or mandatory? It appears to be optional. "The adverbial may actually follow the object noun..."
Ok!
I think the stanza in paq'batlh you're referring to is indeed doing this object-fronting.
Sorry, but with *object-fronting* do you mean here (in the PB) topic or focus? Only to be sure if I've understood it properly (I'm taking as a reference the classification you made in this post: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-October/018287.html): a. The use in relative clauses and in copulas is clear. If not speaking about the subject or object of a relative clause or about a copula, then: b. When *-'e'* goes on a subject, it's always focus. c. When *-'e'* goes on an object which is not hanging out at the beginning of a sentence, it's focus. d. When *-'e'* goes on a noun / noun phrase which is hanging out at the beginning of a sentence, it can be topic or focus (object as focus). I've written some examples and I would be very glad to know if they are correct. Thank you for your patience! 1. paq'e' yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it - Context: We're speaking about several things, I've mentioned the book before and now I want to speak again about it and say something new about this matter (you should buy it). 2. paq'e' yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK - Context 1: You aren't sure if you should buy the book or the movie and I want to encourage you to buy the book, not the movie / Context 2: You've misunderstood me, you think I've said: *Buy the movie*, but I've meant the book, not the movie, so I repeat my sentence emphasizing *book*. 3. paq'e' DaH yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it now - Same as above with adverbial. The version *DaH paq'e' yIje'* is not possible as topic. 4. DaH paq'e' yIje', paq'e' DaH yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK now - Same as above with adverbial. 5. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy the first part (now) - Since we already have an object, *paq'e'* cannot be focus. 6. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch'e' yIje' (?) - Topic and focus (?) - As for the book, buy THE FIRST PART (now) - buy now the first part, not the second one or the complete book _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
janSIy:
I'm not sure Kingons consider there to be a difference. Call it "fopic" - it brings attention and focus to the word, whether it is acting more like what English linguists call "focus" or more like what they call "topic" and whether it appears before any adverbs, in the traditional object location, in the traditional subject location, or after a subject pronoun acting as connecting verb. For English speakers, I like to describe **-'e'** as having four uses, but I suspect that a Klingon would see it all as just the same single use applied in different situations.
Thank you for your reply, janSIy! I like your idea of a Klingon "fopic" :-) I think I understand now how topic/focus works in Klingon much better, but I still don't feel comfortable using *-'e'* this way. When I write in Klingon, I never get the feeling that I'm doing it right (and not only with regard to topic/focus!). I'm really more than grateful for the help I get in this email list (and for free!), so I'm feeling now a bit guilty for asking this, but if anyone could take a quick look to the examples I wrote in my last post and tell me if they are overall correct or maybe I din't get it yet, it would be great. But if you don't feel like it or you don't have the time, I fully understand it!
SuStel:
chang'e' DaH Sam Find Chang now! In this context, I believe the sentence can be interpreted like so: Chang! Find him now! That is, it's using the object noun as a topic instead of a focus. SuStel: The parallel sentence in TKD gives us what seems to be a focus interpretation (HaqwI''e' DaH yISam Find the SURGEON now!), but no context is given, so it's a little hard to interpret.
I'm afraid you lost me here; the {chang'e' DaH Sam} and {HaqwI''e' DaH yISam} seem identical with the only difference being that the first uses clipped klingon. So, couldn't there be the opposite interpretation as well, i.e. the {chang'e' DaH Sam} using the focus function of {-'e'}, and the {HaqwI''e' DaH yISam} using the topic function {-'e'}? -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
On 10/20/2021 8:05 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
SuStel:
chang'e' DaH Sam Find Chang now! In this context, I believe the sentence can be interpreted like so: Chang! Find him now! That is, it's using the object noun as a topic instead of a focus. SuStel: The parallel sentence in TKD gives us what seems to be a focus interpretation (HaqwI''e' DaH yISam Find the SURGEON now!), but no context is given, so it's a little hard to interpret. I'm afraid you lost me here; the {chang'e' DaH Sam} and {HaqwI''e' DaH yISam} seem identical with the only difference being that the first uses clipped klingon.
So, couldn't there be the opposite interpretation as well, i.e. the {chang'e' DaH Sam} using the focus function of {-'e'}, and the {HaqwI''e' DaH yISam} using the topic function {-'e'}?
Yes, that's why I said the various functions of *-'e'* are closely related, and I think pushing the object out in front of the adverbial where other non-subject, non-object nouns might go further blurs the lines. I agree with JanSIy that Klingons pay more attention to the context in which *-'e'* is used more than in trying to understand arbitrary distinctions in its use. I think fronting an object with *-'e'* might be changing its context from "special object" to "what the whole sentence is about." Wikipedia article on topic (but note that the word /focus/ on that page is used in a slightly different way than what we're talking about here): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_and_comment Wikipedia article on focus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_(linguistics) Look over the beginning of those two pages, then compare them to what TKD says about *-'e'* in various places. You'll see that the use of *-'e'* in copulas matches what is said about topic, while the use of *-'e'* in subjects and objects matches what is said about focus. *-'e'* on a non-subject, non-object noun is not explicitly addressed in TKD, and we have only one clear example of it, the one from ST5, and it matches the description of topic, not focus. The examples in the TKD Addendum of moving the object to before the adverbial /might/ be an example of this, but this is not made explicit or denied. When Gorkon shouts *chang'e' DaH Sam,* is he saying /As for Chang, find him now!/ or is he saying /Find Chang (not someone else) now!/ I'm not entirely sure, though I guess that it's the former. If that's the case, then it may be that "fronting" the object with *-'e'* is not just a syntactic trick, but means you're actually changing the context of the noun from being an object (where *-'e'* means focus) to being a non-subject, non-object noun, where *-'e'* apparently means topic. But we don't KNOW any of this for sure, so I can't give you the solid answers you both keep asking for. Okrand himself admitted error in calling *-'e'* topic in TKD where he uses it as focus. I think he's not entirely clear on the distinction himself, or wasn't until Lawrence pointed it out to him. So, in general, try to use *-'e'* as focus when putting it on subjects or objects that aren't head nouns of relative clauses, and try to use it as topic when putting it on nouns at the end of copulas. For the weird cases, take your best guess. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
jatlh luis.chaparro:
1. paq'e' yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it - Context: We're speaking about several things, I've mentioned the book before and now I want to speak again about it and say something new about this matter (you should buy it). 2. paq'e' yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK - Context 1: You aren't sure if you should buy the book or the movie and I want to encourage you to buy the book, not the movie / Context 2: You've misunderstood me, you think I've said: *Buy the movie*, but I've meant the book, not the movie, so I repeat my sentence emphasizing *book*.
Clearly, Klingons do not see this as an important distinction. The grammar does not distinguish any difference in meaning there and a Klingon would probably claim that you are trying to create fine distinctions that are unnecessary. Either way, you're drawing focus to the book, whether it is something new in our conversation, a limitation to just one of the things from our conversation, or a correction of something from our conversation. There is no need to describe this with two different grammatical descriptions. For a Klingon the question is much more one of whether the paq'e' is the intended object of yIje' or not. Imagine we are at a store which sells different types of media. On a display table are four options. There are 1) a book, 2) a film, 3) a special pack including the same book with a lot of extras, and 4) a special pack including the same film with a lot of extras. You are trying to decide if the extras are worth it and ask me, lo'laHghach yap ghaj'a' vey? To which I respond, paq'e' yIje'. Now, do I mean, "Buy THE BOOK," or "As for the book, buy it," ("it" being the paq vey and my suggesting intended to convey "The one with the book is worth it"). Because it's not clear, my answer is a poor answer, but that happens sometimes in natural speech, so let's break it down. An English linguist might be tempted to break this down as saying that if I intended "focus" I would mean "Buy THE BOOK," but if I intended "topic" I might mean "Buy the book one (i.e. set)." But I suspect that a Klingon would not consider that to be the distinction and just ask if paq'e' was intended to the object or a noun providing context in addition to the assumed object (which would be the previously mentioned vey).
3. paq'e' DaH yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy it now - Same as above with adverbial. The version *DaH paq'e' yIje'* is not possible as topic. 4. DaH paq'e' yIje', paq'e' DaH yIje' - Focus - Buy THE BOOK now - Same as above with adverbial.
Again, I suspect that a Klingon would not really see a significant difference between the intended meanings here. They all draw attention and specificity to the paq'e'. I think the more important difference for a Klingon would be that movement of the paq'e' in front of the DaH. DaH paq'e' yIje' would mean, "Buy THE BOOK now!" paq'e' DaH yIje' would mean, "THE BOOK, buy it now!" It brings extra focus and attention to it by fronting it, but I don't think a Klingon would say it is acting in a different grammatical capacity, just that extra attention has been brought to it by moving it to the front.
5. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch yIje' - Topic - As for the book, buy the first part (now) - Since we already have an object, *paq'e'* cannot be focus.
Here the paq'e' is not acting as either the subject or the object and is clearly acting as extra context for the sentence. But that is not because a Klingon might categorize it as "topic" instead of "focus", but rather that it is something extra in the sentence and not one of the standard arguments.
6. paq'e' (DaH) 'ay' wa'DIch'e' yIje' (?) - Topic and focus (?) - As for the book, buy THE FIRST PART (now) - buy now the first part, not the second one or the complete book
Same as for 5, I think. It feels a little like overkill to say that both nouns are important and need to be the fopic* of the sentence. It's not grammatically incorrect and I have no problem at all with multiple -Daq nouns, but somehow multiple -'e' nouns feels like overkill and will probably get rolled eyes from me. *fopic - it's a word I made up to say that Klingons think of the word as both focus and topic without any distinction. It's not a real word and it is not broadly understood. I used it here more for the humor of recalling my silly word from another email. You are welcome to use it, but you should define it when you do and explain that it is not a real word. janSIy
Wow! Thank you very much, janSIy, for the detailed analysis! With your help and SuStel's I got a really good overview of this topic!
participants (4)
-
janSIy . -
luis.chaparro＠web.de -
mayqel qunen'oS -
SuStel