[Tlhingan-hol] Weather infinitives

[David Trimboli]

On 7/23/2012 3:06 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:13 PM, David Trimboli <david at trimboli.name> wrote:
>> I was thinking about how Okrand side-stepped the issue of the subject of SIS
>> (and peD) by simply looking up and saying, {SIS!}
>
> He didn't sidestep it. He didn't state the subject when he *used* the
> word, but he had already indicated what it was.

And what was it? What did he indicate that it is? Nowhere in DloraH's 
post can I find anywhere that says that Okrand actually told him what 
the implied subject is.

He said you *could* talk about the clouds raining cats and dogs, but 
this is different than just talking about the weather. It's similar in 
English: you wouldn't say "the clouds are raining" to say that it's 
raining outside.

> http://www.kli.org/tlhIngan-Hol/1998/May/msg00518.html
> | [reported by DloraH]
> | SISlu', altho grammaticlly correct, he didn't particularly like.  Someone
> | COULD use it but to me it sounds like they skipped science class and don't
> | know what the subject is.
> | You can also give it an object and say things like the clouds rained down
> | cats and dogs. ...or something like that; you get the idea.
>
>> Although Klingon has no
>> inflection for infinitives†, I wonder if speaking of the weather is done by
>> treating the weather-verb as an infinitive.
>
> What reason is there to think that might be the case?

Because all of the examples of speaking of the weather that Okrand gives 
in DloraH's report have no subject. Because it seems that using no 
subject is the correct way of speaking about the weather in a general way.

Because I'm *WONDERING* and not looking to be groused at.

>> In English we avoid the infinitive by adding a dummy subject, "it." Klingon
>> might also be treating this as an infinitive verb, but without a form for
>> infinitive it just uses the verb without a subject.
>
> Nope. If we accept that DloraH was accurately relaying the
> conversation, {SIS} has a subject.

Which is what?

>> † That is, using a verb that is not limited to a particular subject.
>
> Unless you've forgotten about the "indefinite subject" suffix {-lu'}
> -- and I know you haven't -- I don't understand what you mean when you
> say "Klingon has no inflection for infinitives".

-lu' does not form an infinitive, it forms a verb with an impersonal 
subject. An impersonal subject *is* a particular subject: it's the 
impersonal one. There's a big difference.

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