Apposition in the *paq'batlh*
*qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD’e’ Hop juHlIj nov* What is an envoy of Molor, Son of Markag, doing in these woods? You are far away from home, stranger. (paq'yav 3, 1-3) Maybe I'm understanding this wrong, but wouldn't that mean that the envoy is the son of Markag? Since *'e'* gives us the reference for *ghaHtaH*, *ghaHtaH* = *molor Duy'* and *ghaHtaH* = *marqagh puqloD*: He is an envoy of Molor and he is the son of Markag. Shouldn't it have been something like *molor marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? Or maybe *molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? By the way: A bit later we see *molor QaS HoS* for *The men of mighty Molor*. Why isn't it *molor HoS QaS*? Thank you for your help!
I'm not sure. I am curious as to why {marqagh puqloD} is also tagged with {-'e'}. It makes sense to tag {molor Duy} with {-'e'} as {Duy} is the subject of {ghaHtaH}, not {molor}: qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' Why is Molor's envoy in the woods? Do both parts of a name + patronymic need to be so tagged since the formula is an apposition? Do we have any other examples of {X Y puqloD/puqbe'} tagged with 'e'? (This is the only one I know of.) I don't recognize the name. Do we know that Markag is, in fact, the father of Molor? Is he mentioned anywhere else in the paq'batlh? I wonder... has this line been changed in PB 2nd edition? -- Voragh ---------------------------Original Message------------------------- From: luis.chaparro--- via tlhIngan-Hol Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 6:29 AM *qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD’e’ Hop juHlIj nov* What is an envoy of Molor, Son of Markag, doing in these woods? You are far away from home, stranger. (paq'yav 3, 1-3) Maybe I'm understanding this wrong, but wouldn't that mean that the envoy is the son of Markag? Since *'e'* gives us the reference for *ghaHtaH*, *ghaHtaH* = *molor Duy* and *ghaHtaH* = *marqagh puqloD*: He is an envoy of Molor and he is the son of Markag. Shouldn't it have been something like *molor marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? Or maybe *molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? By the way: A bit later we see *molor QaS HoS* for *The men of mighty Molor*. Why isn't it *molor HoS QaS*? http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Thinking some more about apposition... The closest examples I could find were: qIvo'rIt toQDuj 'oH tlhIngan wo' Duj pagh'e' The Imperial Klingon Vessel Pagh is a K'Vort-class Bird-of-Prey. (S7) ... where {tlhIngan wo' Duj} is in apposition to {pagh}. Note that only the ship name is tagged with {-'e'}; {Duj} is not. juHqo' Qo'noSvo' loghDaq lengtaHvIS tlhInganpu' During the (aggressive) expansion of the Klingon people from their homeworld of Kronos into space... (SP1) ... again, only the proper noun {Qo'noS} is tagged. We know that suffixes are repeated with multiple nouns in sequence: ... tlhIngan'e', tera'ngan'e', romuluSngan'e' [... a Klingon, a Terran, a Romulan (untranslated)] (ST6) Paramount Pictures malja' permey bIH Star Trek pong'e' Deghmey'e' je "Star Trek" and related marks are trademarks of Paramount Pictures. (Copyright) poSDaq nIHDaq je QamtaHvIS SuvwI'pu', chaH jojDaq yItnIS lopwI' The initiate must pass through a gauntlet of warriors. (S9) i.e. "while standing on the left side and on the right side" tIngvo' 'evDaq chanDaq from area-southwestward to area-northwestward to area eastward (st.klingon 11/21/1999) 'ej Hoch vengHomDaq Hoch vengDaq je In every village and city (PB) i.e. "in every village and in every city" Locative suffixes are also repeated when increasing precision is needed: tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq 'oH toQDuj chenmoHlu'meH Daq wa'DIch'e' 1st Construction Site: The Kling District, Klingon Home World. (KBoP) i.e. "on the Klingon Homeworld, in the Kling District". loghDaq lupDujHom qoDDaq bIlengtaHvIS, nIbuQbogh novpu' DaSuv Battle menacing aliens in a shuttlecraft journey through space. (STX) i.e. "in space, inside a shuttlecraft" I admit that not all of these are useful in answering Luis's question WRT apposition, but they do show a greater tolerance for what an English-speaker would consider redundant repetition. <g> Voragh ------------------------------Original Message------------------------------ From: Steven Boozer via tlhIngan-Hol I'm not sure. I am curious as to why {marqagh puqloD} is also tagged with {-'e'}. It makes sense to tag {molor Duy} with {-'e'} as {Duy} is the subject of {ghaHtaH}, not {molor}: qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' Why is Molor's envoy in the woods? Do both parts of a name + patronymic need to be so tagged since the formula is an apposition? Do we have any other examples of {X Y puqloD/puqbe'} tagged with 'e'? (This is the only one I know of.) I don't recognize the name. Do we know that Markag is, in fact, the father of Molor? Is he mentioned anywhere else in the paq'batlh? I wonder... has this line been changed in PB 2nd edition? -- Voragh ---------------------------Original Message------------------------- From: luis.chaparro--- via tlhIngan-Hol Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 6:29 AM *qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD’e’ Hop juHlIj nov* What is an envoy of Molor, Son of Markag, doing in these woods? You are far away from home, stranger. (paq'yav 3, 1-3) Maybe I'm understanding this wrong, but wouldn't that mean that the envoy is the son of Markag? Since *'e'* gives us the reference for *ghaHtaH*, *ghaHtaH* = *molor Duy* and *ghaHtaH* = *marqagh puqloD*: He is an envoy of Molor and he is the son of Markag. Shouldn't it have been something like *molor marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? Or maybe *molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD Duy'e'*? By the way: A bit later we see *molor QaS HoS* for *The men of mighty Molor*. Why isn't it *molor HoS QaS*? 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
Thank you, Voragh, as always, for the useful information! Yes, the problem is that in other examples of appositions only the last noun has, if needed, a type 5 suffix (like in noun-noun constructions) and, in addition to this, in the sentence of the *paq'batlh* the son of Markag is actually Molor, and not the envoy. So I don't really understand the grammar of that sentence.
I don’t know the whole story of paq’batlh. I want to make sure that you are telling me that some other part of the story establishes that Molor is the son of Markag, right? Also, you are sure that Molar isn’t sending his brother as his envoy, right? Some other context has told you that the envoy is not the son of Markag? The English translation does not make that clear. "What is an envoy of Molor, Son of Markag, doing in these woods?" That can mean either: 1. What is an envoy of [Molar, Son of Markag] doing in these woods? 2. What is [an envoy of Molar], [Son of Markag] doing in these woods? Nothing in the English sentence tells us whether “Son of Markag” is in apposition with just “Molar” or “envoy of Molar. Honestly, if I just saw the Klingon {qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD’e’}, I’d definitely interpret that the apposition is that one person is being addressed, and that one person is both the envoy of Molar and son of Markag. The choice to put {-‘e’} on both {Duy} and {puqloD} suggest heavily that they are of equal note in the question. You know it’s not two people because {ghaH} is singular, and if there were only one {-‘e’}, it would be something like “the son of Markag’s envoy’s Molar” or “Molar’s envoy’s Markag’s son." pItlh charghwI’ ‘utlh (ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)
On Oct 20, 2023, at 6:36 AM, luis.chaparro--- via tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org> wrote:
Thank you, Voragh, as always, for the useful information!
Yes, the problem is that in other examples of appositions only the last noun has, if needed, a type 5 suffix (like in noun-noun constructions) and, in addition to this, in the sentence of the *paq'batlh* the son of Markag is actually Molor, and not the envoy. So I don't really understand the grammar of that sentence.
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 9:31 PM Will Martin via tlhIngan-Hol < tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org> wrote:
Honestly, if I just saw the Klingon {qatlh ngemDaq ghaHtaH molor Duy'e' marqagh puqloD’e’}, I’d definitely interpret that the apposition is that one person is being addressed, and that one person is both the envoy of Molar and son of Markag.
Yes, I think that's what most people would expect it to mean. It's pretty clear in the Klingon that the son and the envoy are grammatically the same entity. But it's also just as clear in Trek lore that Markag's son is Molor himself. That mismatch is why Luis (and others) questioned the correctness of the line. The appropriate answer is probably "The line does not say the same thing in Klingon and in English. The English is most likely right, and the Klingon is most likely wrong." -- ghunchu'wI'
Thank you, charghwI' and ghunchu'wI' for your replies! charghwI':
Nothing in the English sentence tells us whether “Son of Markag” is in apposition with just “Molar” or “envoy of Molar.
I'm not a native English speaker, but in Spanish this ambiguity is also possible, although the combination proper noun and *son of* is very common, so I would probably interpret it at first sight as apposition to *Molor*. I don't find *Markag* again in the *paq'batlh*, but at Memory Beta Molor is defined as the son of Markag: https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Molor Anyway, the Klingon text seems to say something different, but as Voragh showed, in other canonical examples of apposition only the second noun has a type 5 suffix, so if the envoy is the son I would have expected: *molor Duy marqagh puqloD’e’*. ghunchu'wI':
That mismatch is why Luis (and others) questioned the correctness of the line.
The appropriate answer is probably "The line does not say the same thing in Klingon and in English. The English is most likely right, and the Klingon is most likely wrong."
Thank you for clarifying it!
participants (4)
-
Alan Anderson -
luis.chaparro＠web.de -
Steven Boozer -
Will Martin