De'vID:

Why do you insist that sequences of words have one and only one meaning, independent of context?

I don't insist; I'm only trying to learn, something which will not happen if I take things for granted. lieven:

I like the way you ask your questions. It shows that you are not only thinking from an english point of view :-)

this is good to hear ! lieven:

Sounds like "we killed some of them, but there still is one more" I've always seen this as {latlh HIvje' vIneH} "I want another glass" (I already have one) SuStel: latlh qab another face another's (someone else's) face an additional face

These answer perfectly my question. Thanks ! However there's an additional question I need to ask.. Some time ago, at another thread I had written (latlh Dochmey} and {latlhmey Doch}, and asked "is any of the two preferable, or more correct than the other" ? Then SuStel replied: "that depends, do you want to say the other's things or the others' thing ?" Now, lets forget for a moment that in order to say "additional things" I can just write {latlhmey}; would it be correct to assume that both (latlh Dochmey} and {latlhmey Doch}, apart from the above translations written by SuStel, can mean "additional things" as well ? qunnoH jan puqloD On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:02 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

On 11/28/2016 6:41 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

There is something I can't understand with regards to the {latlh}.

first, lets read these canon examples:

{reH latlh qabDaq qul tuj law' Hoch tuj puS} the fire is always hotter on someone else's face

{latlh HIvje'Daq 'Iw HIq bIr yIqang} pour the cold bloodwine into another glass

I want to ask:

1. the {latlh qabDaq} and the {latlh HIvje'Daq} mean ONLY "the face of another" and "the glass of another" respectively, or do/can they mean as well "an additional face" and "an additional glass" ?

It can mean any or all of these. latlh means all the things associated with other, another, and additional.

latlh qab another face another's (someone else's) face an additional face

latlh HIvje' another cup another's cup an additional cup

Which meaning you get from it depends on context.

In case you wonder why I'm asking..

Suppose I want to say "for us there is an additional enemy", so I write {maHvaD latlh jagh tu'lu'}. Does this klingon sentence mean indeed "for us there is an additional enemy", or does it actually mean "for us there is an enemy of another", which doesn't make sense ?

What does the context say? Out of context, I'd probably assume the additional meaning, as in "for us there is yet another enemy (which hasn't been discussed before)."

But suppose enemies were being matched up. "For you there is your enemy; for Bob there is Bob's enemy." Then we want to make the point that our enemy is not whom you'd expect. maHvaD latlh jagh tu'lu' for us there is someone else's enemy.

Sure, that's pretty contrived, but it illustrates that it's not impossible to take another meaning based on context.

-- SuStel http://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

The basic problem here is that {latlh} is a noun in Klingon, but can be translated in several ways, depending on what you mean. This still is not visible in English, but in German for instance, capitalization makes clear: Noun: (as in "where are the others?") {latlh} "the other" der Andere vs Indefinite pronoun, meaning "a different thing" {latlh loD} "the other man" (so "not this man") der andere Mann And then we even have the meaning of "more": "I'd like another beer". I'm sure I may be mixing some semantical/linguistics terms here, but I hope that my message came trough: different ideas combined in ony Klingon word, but they seem all to work the way we guess they do. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net

SuStel:

*latlhmey Doch* *others' thing(s)* I wouldn't use *latlhmey* *X* to mean *additional * *> Xs. *Explicitly using the plural suffix seems to lock it into the "someone else" meaning, though I can't say exactly why.

I just noticed this.. In order to have the "someone else's" meaning, shouldn't we have {latlhpu'} instead of {latlhmey} ? qunnoH jan puqloD ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 28 Nov 2016 6:52 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

DaH jIyaj. Satlho' !

qunnoH jan puqloD

On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 6:29 PM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:

...

The basic problem here is that {latlh} is a noun in Klingon, but can be translated in several ways, depending on what you mean. This still is not visible in English, but in German for instance, capitalization makes clear:

Noun: (as in "where are the others?") {latlh} "the other" der Andere

vs

Indefinite pronoun, meaning "a different thing" {latlh loD} "the other man" (so "not this man") der andere Mann

And then we even have the meaning of "more": "I'd like another beer".

I'm sure I may be mixing some semantical/linguistics terms here, but I hope that my message came trough: different ideas combined in ony Klingon word, but they seem all to work the way we guess they do.

-- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org