[Tlhingan-hol] 'ar again

[Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh]

jatlh SuStel:
> I don't think {'ar} ever means "what portion?". With countable nouns it
> means "how many?", and with non-countable nouns it means "what amount?".

vIjang jIH, jIjatlh:
> I know of absolutely no evidence to support a grammatical distinction
> between countable and non-countable nouns in Klingon.

jang SuStel, jatlh:
> It's not a distinction in Klingon; it's a distinction in the English 
> translation. How {'ar} is translated depends on context, but it's
> always  {'ar} no matter what the translation.

yaj.

taH SuStel:
> bIQ 'ar
> how much water?
> (unless you're talking about water served in cups, in which case the
> translation would be "how many waters?", but the distinction is an
> English one, not a Klingon one)

jIH:
> So if it works in this direction (a -count noun is treatable as +count
> noun), why do you contend it doesn't work in the other direction?

SuStel:
> I don't. I contend that {'ar} either counts the number of things that 
> are countable, or the quantity—not portion—of things that are not.

So for you, is {nIn Hoch natlhlu'pu'} - which specifies a portion, and not a number - not an acceptable answer to the question {nIn 'ar natlhlu'pu'}?

SuStel:
> Since {Hol} is a countable noun, the correct translation would be
> Hol 'ar
> how many languages?
> The translation would not be "how much of a particular language?",
> though I could see a metaphorical "sea of language" {Hol bIQ'a'} leading
> to the phrase {Hol 'ar} "how much (of the sea of) language?".

jIH:
> This argument fails for me in that it imposes the English +/-count
> distinction onto Klingon where no evidence for such a distinction
> exists. I don't understand why a Hol bIQ'a' should be treated any
> differently from a Hol alone,

SuStel:
> Now that I've stated clearly that the Klingon does NOT make this 
> distinction, do you see how {Hol 'ar} and {Hol bIQ'a' 'ar} are 
> grammatically the same?

I think we're talking past each other on this point; I already agreed that {Hol 'ar} and {Hol bIQ'a' 'ar} are grammatically the same. I was labouring under the impression that you saw them as somehow different.

jIH:
> and I'd contend that {Hol 'ar Dajatlh} can
> mean either "how many languages do you speak?" or "how much of the
> language(s) do you speak?",

SuStel:
> Let me turn the must-show-evidence argument back at you. I see 
> absolutely no evidence that {'ar} means "how much of <something>?" The 
> translation is "how much?", not "how much of?" Can you point to any such 
> evidence?

Nothing unequivocal, but we have only a single canon instance of {'ar} in a sentence with a -count noun; the English for {nIn 'ar wIghaj?} (PK) was given as "how much fuel do we have left?", which can be interpreted either as a quantity, or as a portion, and the parallel sentence {nIn Hoch natlhlu'pu'} from KGT pushed me in the direction of the portion interpretation. Anyway, Klingon entirely lacks a grammatical tool for expressing the partitive in general. Call it an assumption, but I didn't think "how much of?" was too far of a jump from translations like the following:

wa' tlhIngan ghob potlhqu'
"one of the [sic] most important Klingon virtues" (S13)

(Yes, I get that the Klingon says "one very important Klingon virtue".) At any rate, I understand what you mean now.

QeS
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20130201/518bc814/attachment.html>