[Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' javmaH Soch: <voqHa'chuqghach>

[David Trimboli]

On 10/28/2011 2:27 PM, Robyn Stewart wrote:
>
> At 10:53 28/10/2011, David Trimboli wrote:
>> On 10/28/2011 1:19 PM, Qov wrote:
>>
>>> 2. ghunchu'wI' started discussion on the thing that I found.
>>> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Qov <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
>>>> > jatlh "qavoqbe' bIjatlh."[38]
>>>> > ...
>>>> > [38] Ok this is a way more interesting question than the one about
>>>> whether I
>>>> > should use the word jatlh or ja' every time I use quotation marks. I
>>>> want to
>>>> > see how you react to this, then I will tell you what I am thinking
>>>> about it.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, that's neat. I didn't think anything of it when I read it,
>>>> besides quietly noting that it was properly formed as reported speech
>>>> according to TKD. Now that you point it out as something worth
>>>> focusing on, I realize that what she actually had said was {vIvoqbe'}.
>>>>
>>>> It works. I'm willing to consider it the moral equivalent of
>>>> tense-mangling in English reported speech: "You said you were bringing
>>>> donuts next week." If you think too hard, it seems broken, but it's
>>>> the right way to do it.
>>>
>>> As ghunchu'wI' pointed out, what 'eSSIm said was vIvoqbe' - I don't
>>> trust him . What Mahoun would say in English would be "You said you
>>> don't trust me." Outside the context of this story, if I asked you how
>>> to say "You said you trust me," in Klingon, everyone would say <bIjatlh
>>> qavoq> (or <qavoq bIjatlh>). So does the fact that the context made her
>>> actual word be vIvoq mean that bIjatlh qavoq is not correct here? I
>>> think bIjatlh qavoq means "you said you trust me" regardless of whether
>>> the actual words spoken were, "QIpbogh novvetlh SuD vIvoq," "DaHjaj
>>> qavoqchoH," "I trust you" or even "Hovmey Davan." For example in an
>>> earlier draft the next line was "SaH Duj bIjatlhDI'." I don't think
>>> Mahoun ever said the wards "SaH Duj" but he said other words that avered
>>> the existence of a ship, and no one would protest that <SaH Duj
>>> bIjatlhDI'> is not the way to say when you said there was a ship would
>>> they? I think a Klingon can say "You said there was a ship," without
>>> saying <bIjatlh INSERT_EXACT_QUOTATION_HERE.>
>>>
>>> This is the difference between quoted speech and reported speech that I
>>> was getting at in the earlier discussion about whether my use of
>>> quotation marks instead of attributed speech tags was acceptable. (For
>>> the record, and I'm sure the proponents of always using them have
>>> noticed, I've started using them almost always. I still feel that
>>> there's a difference when a character is saying "Person X said this" as
>>> opposed to when *I* am saying it. But the more I thought about it the
>>> more I wanted to use ja' and jatlh each time.)
>>
>> At the beginning of Power Klingon, we have:
>>
>> tlhIngan: nuqneH?
>> Human: 'IH jaj, qar'a'?
>> tlhIngan: jISaHbe'.
>> Human: bISaHbe' qatlh bIjatlh?
>>
>> So your position may be supported. As far as we know, the Human is
>> speaking grammatical Klingon, albeit inappropriately.
>
> What the Human said doesn't support my position. I think the human
> should have said, "jISaHbe' qatlh bIjatlh." The position I have taken is
> that to report what someone said, it is acceptable to paraphrase what
> they said, if necessary changing the addressee for clarity, but
> retaining the words as ones that the person being reported could have
> said in the situation being reported on, i.e. with the correct prefix
> direction for them.
>
> To me, "bISaHbe' qatlh bIjatlh" means "Why did you say I don't care?"
> This example seems to contradict my understanding that you should not
> reverse the direction of the prefixes in reported speech.
>
> Is p.67 of TKD, the exchange in PK and that newsgroup example the sum
> total of our knowledge of reported speech and quotations? Both the
> latter instances are reporting a first person singular no object speech
> act. They seem to directly contradict one another.
>
> tlhIngan jIH bIjatlh - speech reported exactly as the person said it
> bISaHbe' bIjatlh - prefix changed to match the observer's perspective.
>
> I would prefer to resolve the contradiction by assuming the Human made
> an error by formulating the reported speech in the manner of Federation
> Standard and not in the Klingon way.
>
>> But Okrand also gave a counter-example in the old MSN newsgroup, which
>> he describes as "giving a direct quotation":
>>
>> tlhIngan jIH bIjatlh "you say, 'I am a Klingon'"
>>
>> Nowhere has Okrand ever explained that Klingons use reported speech
>> instead of direct quotations.
>
> When he translates HIqaghQo' qaja'pu' as "I told you not to interrupt
> me" he is demonstrating reported speech. If he weren't, the translation
> would have been the literal meaning he gives below. In other words
> Okrand hasn't explained that Klingons use reported speech instead of
> direct quotations, but he has demonstrated that they use what look like
> direct quotations in reported speech.
>
> How do you think Mahoun should say, "You said you don't trust me," in
> this context? <vIvoqbe' bIjatlh>? How should he said it if her exact
> words were. "luvoq latlhpu' 'a jIQoch" or "Davoqbe'nIS 'e' chupmo'
> jupwI' vuDDaj vIlajta'."?

Ah, I see. You're saying that direct quotation need not be a perfect 
reproduction—it's enough to use words the speaker *might* have said if 
they were to say it in a form convenient for the current speaker. I 
agree with this. You're not citing an encyclopedia, you're talking.

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/