Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Type 9-ed verb as SAO
On Dec 2, 2019, at 03:39, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 03:42, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote: Do we have any canon examples of clauses with verbs taking type-9 suffixes which are then used as the object of another verb? For the purposes of this question, ignore {-bogh}, {-ghach}, and {-wI'}, as those all turn the verb into a noun or make it part of a clause that acts as a noun grammatically.
I couldn't find any. I suspect there isn't one because the construction is not grammatical.
Thanks for checking. I’m not surprised that there are no examples to be found, as I share your suspicion. What’s your take on what the referent is for the SAO pronoun in {'e' neHbe' vavoy} from TUC? I really doubt it’s the actual previous sentence as a whole ({QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS}) because it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for the late chancellor to have not wanted that comparison to be true, which is how I would interpret {'e'} actually replacing that whole sentence. So I suspect that in this case {'e'} is either replacing a part of the previous sentence (which part is understood from context), or it’s replacing a previous sentence as a whole other than the immediately preceding one (likely {DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS}), or it’s just referring to some contextually understood “that” which everybody in the conversation is already aware of. My current thinking is it’s most likely referring to the {DIHIvnIS}, which is still not a usage that the description in TKD supports.
On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 14:51, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote:
On Dec 2, 2019, at 03:39, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, 1 Dec 2019 at 03:42, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote:
Do we have any canon examples of clauses with verbs taking type-9 suffixes
which are then used as the object of another verb? For the purposes of this question, ignore {-bogh}, {-ghach}, and {-wI'}, as those all turn the verb into a noun or make it part of a clause that acts as a noun grammatically.
I couldn't find any. I suspect there isn't one because the construction is not grammatical.
Thanks for checking. I’m not surprised that there are no examples to be found, as I share your suspicion.
What’s your take on what the referent is for the SAO pronoun in {'e' neHbe' vavoy} from TUC? I really doubt it’s the actual previous sentence as a whole ({QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS}) because it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for the late chancellor to have not wanted that comparison to be true, which is how I would interpret {'e'} actually replacing that whole sentence. So I suspect that in this case {'e'} is either replacing a part of the previous sentence (which part is understood from context), or it’s replacing a previous sentence as a whole other than the immediately preceding one (likely {DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS}), or it’s just referring to some contextually understood “that” which everybody in the conversation is already aware of.
My current thinking is it’s most likely referring to the {DIHIvnIS}, which is still not a usage that the description in TKD supports.
Really? That's like 5 lines before the {'e'}, including a line also spoken by Azetbur, according to my transcript: KERLA: DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS. GENERAL #1: DIHIvbe'chugh qo'chajDaq toywI''a' DImoj. GENERAL #2: [completely flubbed line] AZETBUR: ghu'maj Dayajbe'law', Sa'. notlh veS 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH. GENERAL #1: QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS. AZETBUR: 'e' neHbe' vavoy. I think it's much more likely to be referring to an implicit {maQamtaHvIS maHegh}. "A is better than B" "But that (i.e., A) is not what daddy wanted." -- De'vID
On Dec 2, 2019, at 08:28, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Really? That's like 5 lines before the {'e'}, including a line also spoken by Azetbur, according to my transcript:
Oops, you’re right, that is a bit further back than I had remembered. I looked up a transcript to remind myself what came right before {'e' neHbe' vavoy} and apparently after just one day had already misremembered the exchange as going straight from {… DaH DIHIvnIS} to {… notlh veS …} to {QamvIS Hegh …} to {'e' neHbe' vavoy}.
I think it's much more likely to be referring to an implicit {maQamtaHvIS maHegh}.
"A is better than B" "But that (i.e., A) is not what daddy wanted."
That does seem more likely.
Keep in mind that the movies are edited by people who don’t speak Klingon. We don’t even know if what we see is what was intended to have been shot. Witness the guy spreading out the map, babbling something like wawawawawawawawawawaaa. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Dec 2, 2019, at 10:10 PM, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylIS.net> wrote:
On Dec 2, 2019, at 08:28, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Really? That's like 5 lines before the {'e'}, including a line also spoken by Azetbur, according to my transcript:
Oops, you’re right, that is a bit further back than I had remembered. I looked up a transcript to remind myself what came right before {'e' neHbe' vavoy} and apparently after just one day had already misremembered the exchange as going straight from {… DaH DIHIvnIS} to {… notlh veS …} to {QamvIS Hegh …} to {'e' neHbe' vavoy}.
I think it's much more likely to be referring to an implicit {maQamtaHvIS maHegh}.
"A is better than B" "But that (i.e., A) is not what daddy wanted."
That does seem more likely. _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 04:22, Will Martin <willmartin2@mac.com> wrote:
Keep in mind that the movies are edited by people who don’t speak Klingon. We don’t even know if what we see is what was intended to have been shot.
It wasn't. I've heard Okrand talk about filming that scene. The reason for the weird {QamvIS} grammar was because that one actor couldn't remember the entire original line, so Okrand had to make it as short as possible while preserving the meaning. However, keep in mind also that Okrand actually went back and retrofitted the language to the final cut of the scene, so that it's supposed to match the meanings of the published subtitles *despite* the fact that the lines may have been edited so that they no longer reflected the original intent. For example, Rosanna DeSoto (Azetbur) mispronounced {vavwI'} and said {vavoy} instead, which is how we got the suffix {-oy}. The fact that this suffix begins with a vowel, contrary to the usual pattern, was because it was invented to fit how she actually pronounced it. Witness the guy spreading out the map, babbling something like
wawawawawawawawawawaaa.
General Kerla was the one who spread the map, and his line was {DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS} (the first line spoken in Klingon) which was quite clear. The flubbed line was "We can take whole by force what they propose to divide!" I've attempted to reconstruct it, but Okrand didn't remember the original line when I asked him. The problem is that the actor flubbed the line so badly that it sounds nothing like what was intended. The only clear part is the {pe'vIl wItlhaplaH} in the middle, which I'm pretty sure is correct because it fits the translation and is in any case clearly audible. There's a pause between {pe'vIl} and {wItlhaplaH}, which could mean that the actor dropped a word in between. He does say something which sounds like "wawa" in the sentence, which is probably what you're remembering, which is likely the verb {wav} "divide". The word {pe'vIl} appears in TKDA (the Appendix to The Klingon Dictionary). Many words in TKDA were invented for Star Trek VI, like {qo'} and {toy'wI''a'} from the same dialogue. TKDA also contains {naQ} "be full, whole, entire" and {lagh} "disassemble, take apart", which fit the translation of this line. (I wonder if {lagh} originated as a mispronounced {naQ} in a different take of this line?) As it stands, what I have is something like this: Qa[ng?] wawa {pe'vIl [pause] wItlhaplaH} ho be gah If anyone's interested to try to recover the original line, here's the scene (sorry I couldn't find a better version on YouTube, I have it on DVD myself): https://youtu.be/ak6Gln1ACnA?t=56 -- De'vID
Thank you for providing the link to the scene. It occurs to me that in this thread, we may have omitted what {‘e’} may most likely be referring to. Look at the last thing SHE said before {‘e’}: “War is obsolete, as we are in danger of becoming.” Likely, THAT is what her father didn’t want. The dialog among the others may very well have been a simple interruption of her self-contained SAO. Given that this is, so far as I know, the one canon example of {‘e’} referring to something that someone ELSE said, maybe it doesn’t actually do that, and we misunderstood how it was being used. Perhaps there are other examples. I know that WE have been using it to refer to what others say, using this example as justification for it being normal. Have we been wrong all these years? Probably not. Someone will probably find another canon example of using {‘e’} to refer to what someone else has said. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Dec 4, 2019, at 6:05 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 04:22, Will Martin <willmartin2@mac.com <mailto:willmartin2@mac.com>> wrote: Keep in mind that the movies are edited by people who don’t speak Klingon. We don’t even know if what we see is what was intended to have been shot.
It wasn't. I've heard Okrand talk about filming that scene. The reason for the weird {QamvIS} grammar was because that one actor couldn't remember the entire original line, so Okrand had to make it as short as possible while preserving the meaning.
However, keep in mind also that Okrand actually went back and retrofitted the language to the final cut of the scene, so that it's supposed to match the meanings of the published subtitles *despite* the fact that the lines may have been edited so that they no longer reflected the original intent.
For example, Rosanna DeSoto (Azetbur) mispronounced {vavwI'} and said {vavoy} instead, which is how we got the suffix {-oy}. The fact that this suffix begins with a vowel, contrary to the usual pattern, was because it was invented to fit how she actually pronounced it.
Witness the guy spreading out the map, babbling something like wawawawawawawawawawaaa.
General Kerla was the one who spread the map, and his line was {DIHIvlaHtaHvIS DaH DIHIvnIS} (the first line spoken in Klingon) which was quite clear.
The flubbed line was "We can take whole by force what they propose to divide!" I've attempted to reconstruct it, but Okrand didn't remember the original line when I asked him. The problem is that the actor flubbed the line so badly that it sounds nothing like what was intended. The only clear part is the {pe'vIl wItlhaplaH} in the middle, which I'm pretty sure is correct because it fits the translation and is in any case clearly audible. There's a pause between {pe'vIl} and {wItlhaplaH}, which could mean that the actor dropped a word in between.
He does say something which sounds like "wawa" in the sentence, which is probably what you're remembering, which is likely the verb {wav} "divide".
The word {pe'vIl} appears in TKDA (the Appendix to The Klingon Dictionary). Many words in TKDA were invented for Star Trek VI, like {qo'} and {toy'wI''a'} from the same dialogue. TKDA also contains {naQ} "be full, whole, entire" and {lagh} "disassemble, take apart", which fit the translation of this line. (I wonder if {lagh} originated as a mispronounced {naQ} in a different take of this line?)
As it stands, what I have is something like this: Qa[ng?] wawa {pe'vIl [pause] wItlhaplaH} ho be gah
If anyone's interested to try to recover the original line, here's the scene (sorry I couldn't find a better version on YouTube, I have it on DVD myself): https://youtu.be/ak6Gln1ACnA?t=56 <https://youtu.be/ak6Gln1ACnA?t=56>
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Dec 4, 2019, at 07:31, Will Martin <willmartin2@mac.com> wrote:
It occurs to me that in this thread, we may have omitted what {‘e’} may most likely be referring to. Look at the last thing SHE said before {‘e’}: “War is obsolete, as we are in danger of becoming.” Likely, THAT is what her father didn’t want.
The dialog among the others may very well have been a simple interruption of her self-contained SAO.
That’s a compelling interpretation, and {manotlhchoH je maH} actually seems to make more sense as a referent for {'e'} than the other previously mentioned candidates. It also makes the {'a} make more sense. The line was: {ghu' Dayajbe'law' Sa' notlh veS 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH} Which was captioned as: War is obsolete, General. As we are in danger of becoming. But actually means: You appear not to understand the situation, General. War is obsolete. But we will also become obsolete soon. If that’s all 'a'Setbur wanted to say, she could have left out the {'a} or used {'ej} instead. “War is obsolete. (And) soon we will be obsolete too.” But if she really intended to say: {notlh veS 'a tugh manotlhchoH je maH neHbe' vavoy} - War is obsolete, but daddy didn’t want us to soon become obsolete as well. … but was interrupted in the middle of her delivery, then the unusual {'e'} could also make sense as an indicator that she’s continuing what she was in the middle of saying. AZETBUR: War is obsolete. But for us to also soon become obsolete… INTERRUPTING CHANG: A death while standing is preferable to a life while kneeling! A: *ahem*, back to what I was saying, daddy didn’t want that. None of that is to say that {'e'} can’t be used to refer to something somebody else has said. Even if this is the only example in canon that appears to show somebody doing that, and it turns out that wasn’t what was happening, there aren’t any rules that say it can *only* refer to the previous sentence of the same person who said {'e'}. TKD just says “the previous sentence as a whole.” It could still be the case that a conversation like this is totally fine: 1: ghaytan nuSuvrupqa' jagh 2: loQ 'e' vIHon … we just may not have canon to support that usage. There is still a lot that we don’t know about Klingon grammar.
On Dec 4, 2019, at 09:07, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote:
That’s a compelling interpretation, and {manotlhchoH je maH} actually seems to make more sense as a referent for {'e'} than the other previously mentioned candidates.
… Having said all that, I rewatched the scene just now, and the way the lines were delivered does seem to suggest that {'e'} didn’t necessarily refer to Azetbur’s previous sentence. Also, I misquoted a line as {ghu' Dayajbe'law'} which should have been {ghu'maj Dayajbe'law'}. And misattributed the {QamvIS Hegh} line to Chang. And also, the {'a} before {tugh manotlhchoH je maH} isn’t particularly clear, and may not have actually been there at all. I suppose there aren’t shooting scripts floating out there somewhere with the actual intended lines written down, otherwise we wouldn’t have to resort to playing scenes and trying to hear what the actors were trying to say through what they were actually saying…
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019 at 16:21, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote:
On Dec 4, 2019, at 09:07, Hugh Son puqloD <Hugh@qeylis.net> wrote:
That’s a compelling interpretation, and {manotlhchoH je maH} actually seems to make more sense as a referent for {'e'} than the other previously mentioned candidates.
…
Having said all that, I rewatched the scene just now, and the way the lines were delivered does seem to suggest that {'e'} didn’t necessarily refer to Azetbur’s previous sentence.
Having watched the scene many times, I don't believe the way the {'e' neHbe' vavoy} line was delivered could indicate anything other than that Azetbur was reacting to the {QamvIS Hegh...} line. Remember, the writers don't know Klingon, and they have no idea about what {'e'} could refer to or how sentences-as-objects work with {neH}. Okrand didn't write the lines, he translated them, and the English shooting script doesn't suggest anything other than Azetbur reacting to something said to her. I think it's overthinking things to try to analyse whether something strange is going on with {'e'}. The concept for that scene was that someone proclaimed "Better to die on our feet!" to Azetbur, who reacted by saying "That's not what my father wanted!" The "that" in the English script most obviously refers to "dying on our feet". That it was translated as {'e'} with {neH} is just a product of circumstance. Also, I misquoted a line as {ghu' Dayajbe'law'} which should have been
{ghu'maj Dayajbe'law'}. And misattributed the {QamvIS Hegh} line to Chang. And also, the {'a} before {tugh manotlhchoH je maH} isn’t particularly clear, and may not have actually been there at all.
I suppose there aren’t shooting scripts floating out there somewhere with the actual intended lines written down, otherwise we wouldn’t have to resort to playing scenes and trying to hear what the actors were trying to say through what they were actually saying…
There is, however, the novelisation, which is based on the writers' notes, and describes Azetbur's thought process in that scene. -- De'vID
What I like most in the 'a'Setbur scene, is her mild demeanor, and how calmly she speaks klingon. I could never understand people, who constantly need to bark and shout klingon, as if someone is driving a spike up their Sa'HutDu'.. ~ changan mIgh
Whenever I try to teach someone some Klingon, the first thing they always try to do it roar it. I have to convince them that they can just use their normal speaking voice. -------- Original message --------From: mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Date: 12/7/19 10:13 AM (GMT-05:00) To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Type 9-ed verb as SAO What I like most in the 'a'Setbur scene, is her mild demeanor, and howcalmly she speaks klingon.I could never understand people, who constantly need to bark and shoutklingon, as if someone is driving a spike up their Sa'HutDu'..~ changan mIgh_______________________________________________tlhIngan-Hol mailing listtlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.orghttp://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Whenever I try to teach someone some Klingon, the first thing they always try to do it roar it. I have to convince them that they can just use their normal speaking voice. -------- Original message --------From: mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Date: 12/7/19 10:13 AM (GMT-05:00) To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Type 9-ed verb as SAO What I like most in the 'a'Setbur scene, is her mild demeanor, and howcalmly she speaks klingon.I could never understand people, who constantly need to bark and shoutklingon, as if someone is driving a spike up their Sa'HutDu'..~ changan mIgh_______________________________________________tlhIngan-Hol mailing listtlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.orghttp://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 6:12 AM De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
It wasn't. I've heard Okrand talk about filming that scene. The reason for the weird {QamvIS} grammar was because that one actor couldn't remember the entire original line, so Okrand had to make it as short as possible while preserving the meaning.
This might also be why *qaq* "be preferable" sounds like *QaQ* "be good" except with the harsh *Q* consonants toned down.
participants (6)
-
De'vID -
Hugh Son puqloD -
mayqel qunen'oS -
nIqolay Q -
SuStel -
Will Martin