[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: -bej versus Sov

[Rohan Fenwick]

ghItlhpu' Chelsea, jatlh:
> {-bej} and {Sov} seem to both occupy a very similar space, so
> I'm trying to muddle out when one is used over the other.
> {-bej} can only be used to describe things the speakers believes
> to be true, so {Sov} is required for everything but singular first
> person, I believe.  But when expressing things that I know, are
> there guidelines for when {-bej} or {jISov} is more appropriate?

Hi Chelsea - I'm QeS, a BG emeritus, whom 'arHa has asked to fill in for him while he faces some health issues. He should be back in the saddle in the next day or two.

You ask a really interesting question here! The short answer is that no, there aren't any firm guidelines. The slightly longer answer is that maybe it depends on how specific you want to be about describing your certainty. If it's important to say that you know something is the case (as opposed to saying that you just really firmly believe it, or that you heard it from someone else, or something like that), then use {Sov}. But {-bej} can be used for a wide range of situations.

If you're in an elevator and you smell a nasty odour, then you could say {ruqlu'bejpu'} - roughly, "someone farted!", with an emphasis that you're certain someone did, based upon the fact that you've actually smelt some evidence. You don't *know* for a fact that someone passed gas, so it might be a little strong to say {ruqlu'pu' 'e' vISov}, but you've got firm evidence on which that conclusion is based anyway. The focus and the nuance of what you're saying are different. With {-bej}, the focus is more on trying to communicate to the other person how trustworthy you find this information. With {Sov}, you're aiming to talk about the fact that you know something to be a fact, but you're leaving the assessment of the information's truth or validity up to the other person.

taH:
> The TKD has the example sentence {nuSeHbej}.  Is there a reason
> it can be rephrased as {nuSeH 'e' jISov}?

Firstly, there's just a minor prefix error there. Remember that {'e'} is a pronoun, the object of the sentence (TKD 6.2.5), so the verb that accompanies it should have a prefix that marks an object (TKD 4.4.1). Want to try to fix this one on your own?

With regard to your specific question, as I explained above, it's a complicated answer but depends on what you want the focus of your utterance to be. These two examples might express the same idea in some contexts. But {-bej} isn't as specific as {Sov} in that regard, and focuses more on communicating the trustworthiness of the information without necessarily divulging how you know that information to be trustworthy.

taH:
> {Doq DujDaj jISov} or {Doqbej DujDaj}?

Again, there's a minor prefix error in your first sentence, plus the fact that you're missing {'e'}. {Doqbej DujDaj} is grammatical and error-free.

taH:
> {cho'IjlaH 'e' jISov} or {cho'IjlaHbej}?
Same prefix error, but easily fixed. Would you like to try correcting all these examples and having another go at them?

QeS 'utlh
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20151223/3775acb4/attachment.html>