If we want to say "I am there" we write {pa' jIHtaH}. But if we want to say "I am not there", what do we write ? {pa' jIHbe'} or {pa' jIHbe'taH} ? mayqel q
On 10/6/2017 11:19 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
If we want to say "I am there" we write {pa' jIHtaH}.
But if we want to say "I am not there", what do we write ?
{pa' jIHbe'} or {pa' jIHbe'taH} ?
We've seen enough examples to know that *-be'* doesn't only negate the single closest preceding element on a verb; it can negate whole verbs and even whole adverb-verb phrases. E.g.: *Hoch DaSopbe'chugh batlh bIHeghbe'.* So say this: *pa' jIHtaHbe'* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
mayqel qunenoS
If we want to say "I am there" we write {pa' jIHtaH}. But if we want to say "I am not there", what do we write ?
{pa' jIHbe'} or {pa' jIHbe'taH} ?
Neither. Write pa’ jIHtaHbe’ “I’m not there” which is a (neutral) statement of fact/location. E.g. qepHomDaq jIHtaHbe'. Saghal. [untranslated greeting from MO to qepHOM 2013] I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]be’taH. If anything, pa’ jIHbe’taH might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time. -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
Initially, I thought of saying {pa' jIHtaHbe'}, but I got the impression that it would mean "I'm not there continuously" i.e. "I'm there, but not continuously". But since this isn't the case, I'm happy. mayqel q On Oct 6, 2017 18:35, "Steven Boozer" <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
mayqel qunenoS
If we want to say "I am there" we write {pa' jIHtaH}.
But if we want to say "I am not there", what do we write ?
{pa' jIHbe'} or {pa' jIHbe'taH} ?
Neither. Write *pa’ jIHtaHbe’* “I’m not there” which is a (neutral) statement of fact/location. E.g.
* qepHomDaq jIHtaHbe'. Saghal.* [untranslated greeting from MO to qepHOM 2013]
I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]*be’taH*. If anything, *pa’ jIHbe’taH *might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time.
-- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 10/6/2017 12:47 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
Initially, I thought of saying {pa' jIHtaHbe'}, but I got the impression that it would mean "I'm not there continuously" i.e. "I'm there, but not continuously".
But since this isn't the case, I'm happy.
It probably means that too, but everyone will know what you mean. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]be’taH. If anything, pa’ jIHbe’taH might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time.
"It's not me that is there." One pulls into their driveway. They see through the windows a silhouette roaming around in the house. The spouse is not supposed to be home yet. They call on the cellphone. "Is that you in the house?" "pa' jIHbe'taH"
And if we want to say "as soon as I'm here again", then do we write {naDev jIHqa'DI'} or {naDev jIHqa'taHDI'} ? mayqel q On Oct 6, 2017 8:11 PM, "DloraH" <seruq@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]be’taH. If anything, pa’ jIHbe’taH might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time.
"It's not me that is there."
One pulls into their driveway. They see through the windows a silhouette roaming around in the house. The spouse is not supposed to be home yet. They call on the cellphone. "Is that you in the house?" "pa' jIHbe'taH"
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Out of those two options, I'm inclined more towards *naDev jIHqa'taHDI'*, since using pronoun verbs to mean "to be in a place" usually takes the *-taH* suffix. *jiHqa'DI'* might work better in the sense of something like *HoD jIHqa'DI'* *"when I'm captain again".* You could also try something like *naDev vIcheghpu'DI'* *"when I have returned here"*. I don't think *jIHqa'taH* is wrong, it's a perfectly understandable and well-formed verb, but *chegh* is a little more straightforward and has been used in canon sentences before. Using an unfamiliar construction like *jIHqa'taH* could draw attention or emphasis to your phrasing there, which might not be what you want. It's possible there might be some other difference in connotation between using *jIHqa'taH* vs. *chegh* that would make using the first construction preferable. My guess is that the first emphasizes your presence after your return, while the second emphasizes the return itself. I'm not sure the difference is so significant that you couldn't just use *chegh* anyway, unless you were trying to evoke some specific mood rather than just conveying the notion of "being back here". On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
And if we want to say "as soon as I'm here again", then do we write {naDev jIHqa'DI'} or {naDev jIHqa'taHDI'} ?
mayqel q
On Oct 6, 2017 8:11 PM, "DloraH" <seruq@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]be’taH. If anything, pa’ jIHbe’taH might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time.
"It's not me that is there."
One pulls into their driveway. They see through the windows a silhouette roaming around in the house. The spouse is not supposed to be home yet. They call on the cellphone. "Is that you in the house?" "pa' jIHbe'taH"
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Interesting thoughts nIqolay q. There is one more thing; I know -because it has been discussed in the list in the past-, that there is a case, where we don't use the {-taH}. But I don't remember for sure, what this case is. I think it is, when we are asking "when will you be here ?", so we say {ghorgh naDev SoH ?} But because I'm not certain, can someone verify this ? mayqel q On Oct 7, 2017 19:33, "nIqolay Q" <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
Out of those two options, I'm inclined more towards *naDev jIHqa'taHDI'*, since using pronoun verbs to mean "to be in a place" usually takes the *-taH* suffix. *jiHqa'DI'* might work better in the sense of something like *HoD jIHqa'DI'* *"when I'm captain again".*
You could also try something like *naDev vIcheghpu'DI'* *"when I have returned here"*. I don't think *jIHqa'taH* is wrong, it's a perfectly understandable and well-formed verb, but *chegh* is a little more straightforward and has been used in canon sentences before. Using an unfamiliar construction like *jIHqa'taH* could draw attention or emphasis to your phrasing there, which might not be what you want.
It's possible there might be some other difference in connotation between using *jIHqa'taH* vs. *chegh* that would make using the first construction preferable. My guess is that the first emphasizes your presence after your return, while the second emphasizes the return itself. I'm not sure the difference is so significant that you couldn't just use *chegh* anyway, unless you were trying to evoke some specific mood rather than just conveying the notion of "being back here".
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
And if we want to say "as soon as I'm here again", then do we write {naDev jIHqa'DI'} or {naDev jIHqa'taHDI'} ?
mayqel q
On Oct 6, 2017 8:11 PM, "DloraH" <seruq@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I’ve never seen an example of [PRONOUN]be’taH. If anything, pa’ jIHbe’taH might mean “I’m still not there” implying continuous absence over some time.
"It's not me that is there."
One pulls into their driveway. They see through the windows a silhouette roaming around in the house. The spouse is not supposed to be home yet. They call on the cellphone. "Is that you in the house?" "pa' jIHbe'taH"
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 1:16 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Interesting thoughts nIqolay q.
There is one more thing; I know -because it has been discussed in the list in the past-, that there is a case, where we don't use the {-taH}.
But I don't remember for sure, what this case is. I think it is, when we are asking "when will you be here ?", so we say {ghorgh naDev SoH ?}
But because I'm not certain, can someone verify this ?
I do vaguely remember a few canon examples of "location" pronoun verbs that were used without *-taH*, which is why I said such verbs usually take that suffix. I don't think those examples necessarily mean you *have* to not use the *-taH* in that situation, only that there are situations where you can get away without it. I don't think sticking to the "locative pronoun verbs take *-taH*" pattern will cause any major mistakes.
On 10/7/2017 12:33 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
Out of those two options, I'm inclined more towards *naDev jIHqa'taHDI'*, since using pronoun verbs to mean "to be in a place" usually takes the *-taH* suffix. *jiHqa'DI'* might work better in the sense of something like *HoD jIHqa'DI'* /"when I'm captain again"./
I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix. The correct phrase in this case would be *naDev jIHqa'DI'*/as soon as I resume being here;/ it makes use of the /resume/ aspect of *-qa'.* The point is to describe how your location changes over time. Most things described this way are just there, so they use *-taH,* but as ghunchu'wI' points out, we have *pa' jIHpu'be'*/I wasn't there,/ which describes /having (not) been/ in a place, which is a concept of completion.*pa' jIHchoHDI'*/when I got there (when I started to be there)/ is also a possibility, and you can probably play with the concepts of *-lI'* and *-ta'* as well. ** -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix.
Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix: "Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'} "Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'} -- ghunchu'wI'
On 10/8/2017 11:29 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix.
Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix:
"Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'}
"Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'}
Any examples where we're not asking questions? -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 10/8/2017 11:36 PM, SuStel wrote:
On 10/8/2017 11:29 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix.
Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix:
"Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'}
"Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'}
Any examples where we're not asking questions?
Here's a sort-of example: *ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'.* But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 11:41 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 10/8/2017 11:36 PM, SuStel wrote:
On 10/8/2017 11:29 PM, Alan Anderson wrote:
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix.
Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix:
"Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'}
"Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'}
Any examples where we're not asking questions?
Here's a sort-of example: *ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'.* But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point.
One thing that is in common between those examples is that the thing in question doesn't move, it's a fixed location. People move around, so you might want to emphasize if someone is in a location for a while (i.e., using the* -taH*), whereas the restaurant or bathroom probably isn't going anywhere. Are there more examples where the thing that is in a place is a fixed feature rather than a person or ship or the like?
Another example of a fixed feature not using a suffix is on the Bird of Prey poster: tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq 'oH toQDuj chenmoHlu'meH Daq wa'DIch'e'. SkyBox 99 had this, referring to Deep Space Nine: qIb HeHDaq, 'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH. Another possibly bad data point, since Deep Space Nine is technically capable of limited movement, even though it really is a fixed feature. But SkyBox S27 had an unambiguous example: pa' 'oHtaH vaS'a''e'. Basically, it’s a mess. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name From: nIqolay Q Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 12:50 AM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Cc: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Saying I'm not there On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 11:41 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote: On 10/8/2017 11:36 PM, SuStel wrote: On 10/8/2017 11:29 PM, Alan Anderson wrote: On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote: I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix. Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix: "Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'} "Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'} Any examples where we're not asking questions? Here's a sort-of example: ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'. But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point. One thing that is in common between those examples is that the thing in question doesn't move, it's a fixed location. People move around, so you might want to emphasize if someone is in a location for a while (i.e., using the -taH), whereas the restaurant or bathroom probably isn't going anywhere. Are there more examples where the thing that is in a place is a fixed feature rather than a person or ship or the like?
Another example of a fixed feature not using a suffix is on the Bird of Prey poster: tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq 'oH toQDuj chenmoHlu'meH Daq wa'DIch'e'. SkyBox 99 had this, referring to Deep Space Nine: qIb HeHDaq, 'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH. Another possibly bad data point, since Deep Space Nine is technically capable of limited movement, even though it really is a fixed feature. But SkyBox S27 had an unambiguous example: pa' 'oHtaH vaS'a''e'. Basically, it’s a mess. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name From: nIqolay Q Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 12:50 AM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Cc: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Saying I'm not there On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 11:41 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote: On 10/8/2017 11:36 PM, SuStel wrote: On 10/8/2017 11:29 PM, Alan Anderson wrote: On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 7:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote: I am of the opinion, informed by no canon whatsoever, that the rule is that pronouns of being in a place require an aspect, but not necessarily a type 7 suffix. Unfortunately, that opinion is contradicted by canon. Again, from the UKE appendix: "Where is a good restaurant?" {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'} "Where is the bathroom?" {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'} Any examples where we're not asking questions? Here's a sort-of example: ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'. But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point. One thing that is in common between those examples is that the thing in question doesn't move, it's a fixed location. People move around, so you might want to emphasize if someone is in a location for a while (i.e., using the -taH), whereas the restaurant or bathroom probably isn't going anywhere. Are there more examples where the thing that is in a place is a fixed feature rather than a person or ship or the like?
Am 09.10.2017 um 05:41 schrieb SuStel:
Here's a sort-of example: *ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'.* But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point.
True. Besides, this example also includes the long discussed "possible" error of having a type five suffix on the first part of a noun noun construction: [ghe''orDaq luSpet] 'oH [DaqlIj]-'e' -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.net http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Locatives
ghe’’orDaq [luSpet ‘oH DaqlIj’e’] For purposes of this discussion I am giving it the benefit of the doubt. Even this way is not of the X-Daq PRO Y-‘e’ variety. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name From: Lieven Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 1:45 AM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Saying I'm not there Am 09.10.2017 um 05:41 schrieb SuStel:
Here's a sort-of example: *ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'.* But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point.
True. Besides, this example also includes the long discussed "possible" error of having a type five suffix on the first part of a noun noun construction: [ghe''orDaq luSpet] 'oH [DaqlIj]-'e' -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.net http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Locatives _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
ghe’’orDaq [luSpet ‘oH DaqlIj’e’] For purposes of this discussion I am giving it the benefit of the doubt. Even this way is not of the X-Daq PRO Y-‘e’ variety. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name From: Lieven Sent: Monday, October 9, 2017 1:45 AM To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Saying I'm not there Am 09.10.2017 um 05:41 schrieb SuStel:
Here's a sort-of example: *ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'.* But it's not of the same form as the others, so it's not a good data point.
True. Besides, this example also includes the long discussed "possible" error of having a type five suffix on the first part of a noun noun construction: [ghe''orDaq luSpet] 'oH [DaqlIj]-'e' -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.net http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Locatives _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 11:19 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
If we want to say "I am there" we write {pa' jIHtaH}.
But if we want to say "I am not there", what do we write ?
{pa' jIHbe'} or {pa' jIHbe'taH} ?
mayqel q
The Klingon Dictionary's appendix of Useful Klingon Expressions includes this example: "I wasn't there." {pa' jIHpu'be'} If you want to use an aspect suffix, this shows the {-be'} following one. If you're prepared to base further discussion on what exactly the distinction in meaning is between {-be'pu'} vs. {-pu'be'} or {-taHbe'} vs. {-be'taH}, then I think you have hit on the best answer: choose your words based on what you want them to mean. -- ghunchu'wI'
participants (7)
-
Alan Anderson -
DloraH -
Lieven -
mayqel qunenoS -
nIqolay Q -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel