does the {'e' qa'} express a preference supplemental
SuStel there's something I'd like to ask you. About a year ago we had discussed about whether the {'e' qa'} expresses a preference, in this thread: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2018-December/009246.htm... There my initial post was: ***** Initial post starts ***** In english one can say: "I learn klingon rather than vulcan" ; meaning simply "I don't learn vulcan, I learn klingon". On the other hand one can say "I'd rather learn klingon instead of vulcan", expressing a preference: "I prefer to learn klingon instead of vulcan". So, the question is, is the {'e' qa'} just a "neutral" "rather/instead of", or is it (too) the wishful "I'd rather ?" The way I understand it, it seems to be the neutral variant, but I would like to make certain. ***** Initial post ends ***** Then you replied: ***** Reply starts ***** In English the preference is expressed by I'd rather or I'd prefer, not by the instead of or rather than. Klingon 'e' qa' is neutral as to preference. In Klingon these could be expressed thus: tlhIngan Hol vIghoj; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' qa'. I learn Klingon instead of Vulcan. tlhIngan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS 'e' qa'. I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan. ***** Reply ends ***** So far so good. I understand your reply, and everything is clear. But what I've just wondered is this: Why can't we express the "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan" by just placing a {'e' vImaS} after the {'e' qa'}? I mean like this: {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' qa' 'e' vImaS} Granted, stringing together two {'e'}s in a row isn't perhaps the best thing to do, but that aside, doesn't the sentence above mean too "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan"? -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
On 12/2/2021 7:50 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
But what I've just wondered is this: Why can't we express the "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan" by just placing a {'e' vImaS} after the {'e' qa'}? I mean like this:
{tlhIngan Hol vIghoj; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' qa' 'e' vImaS}
Granted, stringing together two {'e'}s in a row isn't perhaps the best thing to do, but that aside, doesn't the sentence above mean too "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan"?
Maybe? In English, /instead of/ is an adverbial phrase, but in Klingon *'e' qa'* is a complete sentence. The thing that is replacing something is a separate complete sentence. When you yet another complete sentence, *'e' vImaS,* which refers back to *'e' qa',* are you saying you prefer that it replace something? Are you saying you prefer the replacement instead of the original? Is there any significant difference between these? Your proposed sentence has four independent clauses in it. Are you sure *'e' vImaS* is referring to the correct clause? It's /probably/ okay, but it's a mess. You'd need a native speaker to confirm or deny to get a better answer. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Hol vIghojmeH, tlhIngan Hol vImaS. vulqangan Hol vIpar. matlh rurbogh nuv’e' Hutlh vulqangan Hol. mughojmoHlaH pagh.
On Dec 2, 2021, at 9:06 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 12/2/2021 7:50 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
But what I've just wondered is this: Why can't we express the "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan" by just placing a {'e' vImaS} after the {'e' qa'}? I mean like this:
{tlhIngan Hol vIghoj; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' qa' 'e' vImaS}
Granted, stringing together two {'e'}s in a row isn't perhaps the best thing to do, but that aside, doesn't the sentence above mean too "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan"? Maybe? In English, instead of is an adverbial phrase, but in Klingon 'e' qa' is a complete sentence. The thing that is replacing something is a separate complete sentence. When you yet another complete sentence, 'e' vImaS, which refers back to 'e' qa', are you saying you prefer that it replace something? Are you saying you prefer the replacement instead of the original? Is there any significant difference between these?
Your proposed sentence has four independent clauses in it. Are you sure 'e' vImaS is referring to the correct clause?
It's probably okay, but it's a mess. You'd need a native speaker to confirm or deny to get a better answer.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name <http://trimboli.name/>_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Thu, 2 Dec 2021 at 13:50, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
[quoting SuStel]
tlhIngan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS 'e' qa'.
I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan.
Literally, "I prefer that I learn Klingon. It replaces that I prefer that I learn Vulcan." That is, "I prefer learning Klingon instead of learning Vulcan."
So far so good. I understand your reply, and everything is clear. But what I've just wondered is this: Why can't we express the "I prefer to learn Klingon instead of Vulcan" by just placing a {'e' vImaS} after the {'e' qa'}? I mean like this:
{tlhIngan Hol vIghoj; vulqangan Hol vIghoj 'e' qa' 'e' vImaS}
The problem here is that the {'e' vImaS} is too far away from the {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj}, so that it sounds like {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj} is a statement of fact, not a preference. One is inclined to interpret this literally as "I learn Klingon; I prefer that it replaces that I learn Vulcan" (i.e., you're learning Klingon, and you prefer that this was instead of Vulcan, maybe rather than instead of something else like Romulan or something). It's very confusing. Since I knew the meaning you were going for, you want the sentence to be interpreted like this: "I prefer that: I learn Klingon; it replaces that I learn Vulcan". And I think it can mean that in retrospect, but the fact that one has to think about it should tell you that the construction is confusing. It's a "hindsight" sentence. Why don't you just use the noun form of {'e' qa'}? {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS; vulqangan Hol ('e') qa'} "I prefer that I learn Klingon; it replaces Vulcan". Here, it's clear what {vulqangan Hol} is replacing, since {tlhIngan Hol} is the only other noun explicitly in the sentence. -- De'vID
Thank you SuStel and De'vID for replying. I think that finally I understood the source of my confusion. SuStel:
Your proposed sentence has four independent clauses in it. Are you sure 'e' vImaS is referring to the correct clause?
Initially I didn't understand this. But then I read De'vID's comment:
The problem here is that the {'e' vImaS} is too far away from the {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj}, so that it sounds like {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj} is a statement of fact, not a preference. One is inclined to interpret this literally as "I learn Klingon; I prefer that it replaces that I learn Vulcan" (i.e., you're learning Klingon, and you prefer that this was instead of Vulcan, maybe rather than instead of something else like Romulan or something). It's very confusing.
Then I realized, that perhaps the mistake I was making was taking the {'e' qa'} construction and using it as a whole, placing at the end the {'e' vImaS} believing that everything was clear. I hadn't realized that things would be so complicated. De'vID:
Why don't you just use the noun form of {'e' qa'}? {tlhIngan Hol vIghoj 'e' vImaS; vulqangan Hol ('e') qa'} "I prefer that I learn Klingon; it replaces Vulcan"
Indeed you're right! I totally forgot this option. Again, thank you for taking the time to clarify this. -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
participants (4)
-
De'vID -
mayqel qunen'oS -
SuStel -
Will Martin