Difference between "all X" and "all of X"
There's something I don't understand, which perhaps has to do with the fact that english is not my native language. What's the difference between "all X" and "all of X" ? Suppose I say {vIghro' Hoch mutmey}, which means "all species of the cat". And now suppose I say {vIghro' mutmey Hoch}. which means "all of the species of the cat". Is there a difference in meaning between these two ? And if yes what ? Because, I can't *feel* anything different between them. ~ m. qunen'oS
In English, “All X” means “all members of group X”, while “All of X” means “the entirety of the single entity X”. Drop “species” to make this easier to understand and it’s the difference between the whole cat, or all cats. Adding “species” makes it a little more complicated. I’d interpret it as the difference between all members of the species of a particular cat, vs. the full range of species that one would classify as “cat”, assuming that there is a boundary between different species that we would all call “cat”. If “cat” refers to only one species, then one of the two terms is meaningless. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Jun 21, 2019, at 9:53 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
There's something I don't understand, which perhaps has to do with the fact that english is not my native language.
What's the difference between "all X" and "all of X" ?
Suppose I say {vIghro' Hoch mutmey}, which means "all species of the cat".
And now suppose I say {vIghro' mutmey Hoch}. which means "all of the species of the cat".
Is there a difference in meaning between these two ? And if yes what ? Because, I can't *feel* anything different between them.
~ m. qunen'oS _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 6/21/2019 9:53 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
There's something I don't understand, which perhaps has to do with the fact that english is not my native language.
What's the difference between "all X" and "all of X" ?
Suppose I say {vIghro' Hoch mutmey}, which means "all species of the cat".
And now suppose I say {vIghro' mutmey Hoch}. which means "all of the species of the cat".
Is there a difference in meaning between these two ? And if yes what ? Because, I can't*feel* anything different between them.
First I'll explain the difference between /all X/ and /all of X./ /All X/ means there are multiple X's, and you're looking at the set of all of them. /All of X/ means there is one X and you're considering every part of it. In Klingon, according to rules Okrand has given us and rules we've extracted from the canon, *Hoch Xmey* means /all X/ and *X Hoch* means /all of X./ *Hoch X* means /each X:/ there are multiple X's, and you're looking at all of them one by one. Now regarding your sentence *vIghro' Hoch mutmey.* Once again your noun-scoping defies my senses. I would say this *Hoch vIghro' mutmey*/all species of cat./ Here's why. In your sentence, you're starting with *mutmey* /species./ What kind of species? *Hoch mutmey*/all species./ Fine so far. But then you put another noun in front. What kind of all species? Does that question even make sense? Well, it's the cat kind of all species. Here's what makes more sense. Start with *mutmey*/species./ What kind of species? C/at species, /*vIghro' mutmey.*//Which kind of cat species? All of them: *Hoch vIghro' mutmey.* Now on to your actual question. What, if anything, would *vIghro' mutmey Hoch* mean? Let's look at something a bit more obvious first. *vIghro' pach*/cat's claw./*vIghro' pach Hoch*/all of the cat's claw, every part of the cat's claw./ So what is every part of multiple species? It might be the same as all species, but I rather think this is a phrase that wouldn't be used. You wouldn't use *Hoch* after a plural countable noun. Mass nouns are fine: *bIQ Hoch*/all of the water, every part of the water.**/Inherently plural nouns might be fine if Klingon conceive of them as singular sets of things, like *ngop Hoch*/all of the set of plates./ (In this case you might not say *Hoch ngop,* because you'd be talking about every one of the only set of plates.) In summary: *Hoch Xmey:*//the set of all countable X *Hoch X:* each member of the set of all countable X *X Hoch: *the entire portion of a single X or an uncountable X *X HochHom:* most of the entire portion of a single X or an uncountable X By the way, some people try to use this incorrectly to mean /all of X///(they get tripped up by the English phrase /whole X/): // *X naQ:* an X that is not a partial X -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
Once again your noun-scoping defies my senses. I would say this Hoch vIghro' mutmey all species of cat.
I too, like much more the solution of {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, which you suggest. And in the past, I've though of placing the {Hoch} in the first position of a N-N-N construction, but here is another thing that confuses me. At the {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, doesn't the {Hoch} *have* to act *only* on the {vIghro'} ? Doesn't the meaning *have* to be "the species of each cat" ? I think, something similar has been discussed in the past, but I still have trouble understanding whether the {Hoch} can act "simultaneously" on both the nouns that follow it, or whether it *has* to act only on the noun that is immediately next to it. ~ m. qunen'oS
On 6/21/2019 10:44 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
SuStel:
Once again your noun-scoping defies my senses. I would say this Hoch vIghro' mutmey all species of cat. I too, like much more the solution of {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, which you suggest.
And in the past, I've though of placing the {Hoch} in the first position of a N-N-N construction, but here is another thing that confuses me.
At the {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, doesn't the {Hoch}*have* to act*only* on the {vIghro'} ? Doesn't the meaning*have* to be "the species of each cat" ?
No. In the rules of Klingon, almost any time you see the word /noun/,//you can read it as /noun phrase./ *vIghro' mutmey* is a noun phrase. So in the noun-noun construction *Hoch vIghro' mutmey,* the first noun is *Hoch,* and the second "noun" is *vIghro' mutmey,* a noun phrase. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
FYI I found one example of the {Hoch} modifying a NOUN+NOUN phrase : QaptaHvIS So'wI', Hoch jagh Dujmey DaQotlh. Disable all enemy ships while cloaked. (MKE) {Hoch jagh Dujmey} "all enemy ships" NOT *{jagh Hoch Dujmey}. Can anyone think of another example? ~ Voragh -----------------------------------Original Message----------------------------------- From: mayqel qunen'oS SuStel:
Once again your noun-scoping defies my senses. I would say this Hoch vIghro' mutmey all species of cat.
I too, like much more the solution of {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, which you suggest. And in the past, I've though of placing the {Hoch} in the first position of a N-N-N construction, but here is another thing that confuses me. At the {Hoch vIghro' mutmey}, doesn't the {Hoch} *have* to act *only* on the {vIghro'} ? Doesn't the meaning *have* to be "the species of each cat" ? I think, something similar has been discussed in the past, but I still have trouble understanding whether the {Hoch} can act "simultaneously" on both the nouns that follow it, or whether it *has* to act only on the noun that is immediately next to it. ~ m. qunen'oS _______________________________________________
On 6/21/2019 11:16 AM, Steven Boozer wrote:
FYI I found one example of the {Hoch} modifying a NOUN+NOUN phrase :
QaptaHvIS So'wI', Hoch jagh Dujmey DaQotlh. Disable all enemy ships while cloaked. (MKE)
{Hoch jagh Dujmey} "all enemy ships" NOT *{jagh Hoch Dujmey}.
Can anyone think of another example?
*Hoch puq poH*/all ages (paq'batlh),/ literally /each child period./ *puq poH*//is known to mean /generation./ *Hoch* is modifying *puq poH.* Also from /paq'batlh:/ *Hoch Qo'noS nuvpu'*/every Klingon on the planet,/ literally/all Kronos people./**It's specifically not *Qo'noS Hoch nuvpu'*/Kronos's all the people./ ** We also have canon for *X Hoch* in /paq'batlh:/ *QeHDaj Hoch*/all his rage./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
See however {qamchIy Hoch negh} “The men of Qam-Chee” (PB p.131, lit. “soldiers”). For {Hoch} following a noun: nIn Hoch natlhlu'pu' All the fuel has been consumed. (KGT) and there’s {Qapla'meywIj Hoch} in: bIlay'DI' qaHarbe' [...] jIlay'DI' reH batlh jIpabchugh Qapla'meywIj Hoch vIta'ta' 'e' DaHar'a' quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Your word means nothing to me, [...] Did you think that my word of honor Would have carried me this far? Honor is for those with nothing to lose!" (PB, p.156) -- Voragh From: SuStel On 6/21/2019 11:16 AM, Steven Boozer wrote: FYI I found one example of the {Hoch} modifying a NOUN+NOUN phrase : QaptaHvIS So'wI', Hoch jagh Dujmey DaQotlh. Disable all enemy ships while cloaked. (MKE) {Hoch jagh Dujmey} "all enemy ships" NOT *{jagh Hoch Dujmey}. Can anyone think of another example? Hoch puq poH all ages (paq'batlh), literally each child period. puq poH is known to mean generation. Hoch is modifying puq poH. Also from paq'batlh: Hoch Qo'noS nuvpu' every Klingon on the planet, literally all Kronos people. It's specifically not Qo'noS Hoch nuvpu' Kronos's all the people. We also have canon for X Hoch in paq'batlh: QeHDaj Hoch all his rage. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
This thread makes me happy, because I finally know where to put the {Hoch}. Henceforth (to use the words of darth sidious), I'll try to avoid placing it after a plural noun. And soon, I'll correct the relevant entries at the already translated new testament parts at the wI'qIy. ~ m. qunen'oS
participants (5)
-
Alan Anderson -
mayqel qunen'oS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel -
Will Martin