[Tlhingan-hol] Interesting {je}

[lojmIttI'wI'nuv]

Very interesting.

I keep looking at it in different ways and it always comes up broken. Clearly, he could have used {‘ej} and joined the two sentences, but he didn’t. He followed two sentences with {je} as if they were nouns. The main clause {jIyIn} is identical in the two, so there’s nothing there to really say “also” to in terms of either the subject or the verb.

So, it’s like he’s joining the stuff before the main clause with {je}, which would almost make sense, since {QIStaqDaq} is a noun, and some time words, like {DaHjaj}, are nouns. But {DaH} is an adverb.

If {DaH} were a noun, we could consider this to be his way of saying “At Kri’stak and now, I live.” But what he’s really saying is “When you left me and now, I live.” Two different times are being joined. One is an adverbial and the other is a dependent clause.

That’s pretty weird. It’s like he wanted to say *{QIStaqDaq cholonDI’ DaH je jIyIn}* but couldn’t quite bring himself to do it, so it came out twisted.

Let’s just call it poetry and ignore it. [Wishful thinking, I know.]

pItlh
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv



> On Feb 4, 2016, at 1:44 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 5, 2016 00:51, "SuStel" <sustel at trimboli.name
>> <mailto:sustel at trimboli.name>> wrote:
>> 
>>    I just noticed an interesting line in paq'batlh:
>> 
>>        QIStaqDaq cholonDI' jIyIn
>>           DaH jIyIn je
>>           SoHvaD jIchup
>> 
>>        I am alive as I was
>>           When you left me at Kri'stak,
>>           I have an offer to make.
>> 
>>    The use of {je} here isn't its usual function of a noun conjunction.
>>    The things it seems to be conjoining are {QIStaqDaq cholonDI'} and
>>    {DaH}, i.e., time contexts, neither of which are nouns.
> 
> On 2/4/2016 1:32 PM, André Müller wrote:
>> The {je} here isn't used as a conjunction, but as an adverb following
>> the verb. In that usage it means "and".
>> 
>> Literally the sentences mean:
>> "When you abandoned me at Kri'stak, I was alive.
>> I am also alive now.
>> I suggest to you."
> 
> But it's not an adverbial. As has been recently pointed out to me, it's described in TKD only as a noun conjunction. We're given the example {qaleghpu' je}, and we're told that it means either "I and others saw you" or "I saw you and others." It is not said to mean "In addition to the other thing I did, I saw you."
> 
> In other words, it's conjoining the nouns or pronouns of this sentence with some of those of a previous sentence using the same or a similar verb. For example,
> 
>   qeylIS legh molor
>   Molor sees Kahless
> 
>   moratlh legh je
>   He sees Morath as well as Kahless
> 
>   qeylIS legh je luqara'
>   Lukara, as well as Molor, see Kahless
> 
> TKD is not clear whether {je} would go after the {legh} or the {luqara'} here, or whether you can even have an explicit subject when using {je} in this way.
> 
> > There are lots of examples of such usage in canon.
> 
> Such as? I haven't been able to find any that aren't of the sort described in TKD.
> 
> -- 
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20160204/bcccc4ae/attachment.html>