[Tlhingan-hol] Canon for answering negative questions

[David Holt]

Even when we try to say it will follow a logical pattern, that does not provide us with only one conclusion.  Some have assumed it to be logical for the positive and negative answers to act positively and negatively on the question.  I.e. a positive answer to a negative question results in affirmation of the negative and a negative answer to a negative question results in affirmation of the positive.

However, it is not unreasonable to assume that the logical result would be for the Yes/No to match the positive/negative of the sentence if it were restated.  I.e., if the resulting complete answer would have a {-be'}, then you should use {ghobe'} and if the resulting complete answer wouldn't have a {-be'}, then you should use {HIja'/HISlaH}.  This is just as logical.

So, I'm not sure arguing for it be logical helps us any.  I do have another idea, though, to try and help.  I've always interpreted the alternate "true" gloss as meaning that, in response to a question, the answer HIja'/HISlaH is a recognition that, without the {-'a'} your statement would be true. So... 

{HIja', 'umbe'} and {ghobe', 'um}.

janSIy 


> From: robyn at flyingstart.ca 
> To: tlhIngan-Hol at kli.org 
> Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 15:32:39 -0700 
> Subject: [Tlhingan-hol] Canon for answering negative questions 
> 
> 
> What canon do we have indicating whether the answer to a negative 
> question like : 
> 
> 'umbe''a' loDHom? 
> 
> would be 
> 
> HIja’, ‘um. 
> 
> or 
> ghobe’, ‘um. 
> 
> All I can think of is cheDuQchugh mareghbe’’a’? which is of course 
> rhetorical. 
> 
> Sorry about the smart quotes. jIHvaD QaHqoq ghaq vay’, mail 
> signaturewIj tI’ ‘e’ nIDmo’. I have to redo my mail settings now. 
> 
> - Qov 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Tlhingan-hol mailing 
> list Tlhingan-hol at kli.org 
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol