[Tlhingan-hol] Question regarding purpose clauses

[Felix Malmenbeck]

It seems fairly clear by now that I'm not going to be convincing anybody, but I figure I'll pose a more concrete [non-rhetorical] question:

In a story I'm translating, there's the sentence that reads roughly "...and there was no better prospective wife than Unnur in all of Ragnárvöllum."
I was thinking of translating this to something along the lines of:

...'ej *raqnarvelumDaq Sawlu'meH *'u'nur qaq law' Hoch qaq puS.

...in analogy with {tlhutlhmeH HIq ngeb qaq law' bIQ qaq puS} and {Heghlu'meH QaQ jajvam}. Would this be an acceptable translation?

If not, is it because I've made an error in extrapolating from those examples or when interpreting them, or do you doubt the examples themselves?

ghItlhta' SuStel:
>> which shows that an object can also be {Qatlh}. I suggest that "challenging"
>> is an appropriate gloss in the example of {qIpmeH Qatlh'a'}.
>
> I don't see how thinking of a different English word changes anything.
> "Difficult," "complex," "challenging," the -meH problem is the same.

Aye, the problem really remains: The complexity/difficulty of the the target/purpose does not contribute to the target being hit, nor is it put there because somebody wants it to be hit, so under the ordinary interpretation of -meH, the sentence doesn't work.

ghItlhta' Quvar:
>   difficult to hit you? = nice to meet you?
>   qaqIpmeH Qatlh'a'?    = qaqIHmeH 'IH'a'?
>
> Just some thoughts, I don't know if it helps nor what the original
> question was. ;-)

I actually had "quality/prefereability" as one of my possible alternatives for what the main clause of such a sentence could be, but now I'm not so sure: It doesn't seem to me to be as relevant to the attainment of the purpose as is difficulty or possibility.

ghItlhta' De'vID:
> The best I can get out of that is, "Is it possible, in order to
> accomplish that someone hasn't arrived there yet?"  That is, "Can you
> arrange a situation where someone hasn't arrived there yet?

I wonder if it's a complete coincidence that I start this topic while I'm studying the possible worlds semantic of modal logic: Your interpretation of my sentence is eerily similar to "Can one conceive of a possible world in which nobody has yet arrived?"
Not the same, certainly, but similar.

ghItlhta' De'vID:
> {wej pa' pawlu'law', qar'a'?}  Or maybe {DuH} can be used as a tag
> question: {wej pa' pawlu'law', DuH'a'?}

I rather dislike making or asking for a truth statement when I'm really out for a possibility statement. However, such things are probably to be expected in Klingon, where constructions like {tlhIngan Hol Dajatlh 'e' vIHon} ("You speak Klingon. I doubt that!") are fare for the course.

ghItlhta' Qov:
> So, removing the interrogative, because that
> shouldn't make a difference, for you the change
> from {Qu' Qatlh wIta'nIS} to {Qatlh Qu'
> wIta'nISbogh} breaks the statement of what has to
> happen in order for us to hit it.  I can buy
> that. Can you accept that for some people it doesn't?

Actually, I accept both of those; what I'm saying is that I think this step breaks it for most people:

> Would everyone agree that {wIqIpmeH Qatlh'a' Qu' wIta'nISbogh?} was a
> well formed sentence?

My argument: That's [potentially] fine. The difficulty of the task is directly tied to the accomplishing thereof.
Counter-argument: Nope, can't do that; the difficulty is not there to ensure hitting, nor does the difficulty directly contribute to the hitting, so wIqIp is not the purpose of Qatlh.

>> A day can be good for dying.
>> Fake ale can be preferable for drinking.
>> A mission can be difficult for achieving.
>
> Does the fact that the first two are acceptable
> English sentences and the last one sounds ESL have any bearing on anything?

Hey, now, nothing wrong with ESL ;)

More seriously: No, I don't think so. Many Klingon sentences, when you read them somewhat literally, sound like they're being said either by a new English-speaker or by a robot.

In order that you find alcohol, enter a bar!
When cold revenge is served, the dish is always best.
For the purpose of somebody dying, this day is good.

ghItlhta' Qov:
> Because I know what you are trying to say, I
> wonder if you are approaching it from the English
> "Is it possible for someone to have not yet
> arrived in the room."

I'm certainly not completely free from English bias, but I don't really think this is an example of it: This is my attempt to extrapolate from the canonical examples I've provided, using a broadened interpretation of -meH that I don't think is terribly much at odds with the one we're used to.

By the way, I'm curious:
You seem to accept {wIqIpmeH Qatlh'a'}. Would you also accept {wIqIpmeH DuH'a'}? If so, would you think it'd be a good example of ordinary tlhIngan Hol, or an example of clipped Klingon? If so, what would it be clipped from?

ghItlhta' Qov:
> Say things that need saying. Use the best tools
> at your disposal to express them in the clearest
> manner possible. If people don't understand
> something then rather than trying to explain it,
> rip it out and try a new way to say it.

Actually, I though I'd found a lovely new tool that'd allow for much easier expression, but seeing as nobody accepts it, I'd better avoid using it in public, or teaching it to new speakers.
I'll still probably use it privately, though. ["What a man and his grammatical constructs do in their own bedroom..." and all that.]

________________________________________
From: Lieven Litaer [lieven.litaer at web.de]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 09:07
To: tlhingan-hol at kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Question regarding purpose clauses

Qatlh'a'?

I did not read all the messages, so sorry for repeating something.

I believe the main problem in this translation is the english "it is"
used in many expressions, which does not exist in klingon that way. We
don't think in english what the subject is, but we do in Klingon. Why?

It's raining. What is raining? The sky?
It's time to go.
It's getting dark.
It's not unusual to be feared.
It's nice to meet you. What is nice?

This latter sentence makes me think a little more... what you probably
did in your other messages :-) that is not a "purpose clause", it's a
form of a sentence that does not exist in klingon.
   difficult to hit you? = nice to meet you?
   qaqIpmeH Qatlh'a'?    = qaqIHmeH 'IH'a'?

Just some thoughts, I don't know if it helps nor what the original
question was. ;-)

Lieven.






_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol