[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: Beginner's One-Sentence Story Game

Thu Feb 25 11:40:21 PST 2016

This is very easy to overthink… or underthink. It is alien. Like Klingons. I get confused about this, myself.

jIHvo’ HIghoS.

“Advance along the ‘from me’ path.”

jIHvo’ yIghoS.

“Move along a path somewhere, away from me.”

The difference between {-Daq} and {-vo’} is that {-Daq} indicates a location, while {-vo’} indicates a direction. If you have a path-related verb, like {ghoS}, then giving that path a location for a name typically implies the destination of the path. You know where you are. You know where the destination is. You know the path connects the two. You derive the direction from this.

{-vo’} already tells you the direction. So, if it’s the name of the path you are on, it already tells you the path and the direction. If it is NOT the name of the path (not the direct object of the verb), then it’s just a direction, and it may or may not be on the path.

Okay, so here are clarifying examples:

bIQtIq vIghoS. I go along the river path. It’s likely to be a road to the river. I’m probably headed toward the river on the river path.

bIQtIqDaq vIghoS. I go along the river path. It’s likely to be a road to the river.

bIQtIqDaq jIghoS. I’m in the river, going along a path. I’m in the river the whole duration of the path-traveling. The river is likely a lot bigger than the path. The river is not the direct object of the verb, so “river” is not the name of the path. It’s just a path that is contained by the river.

bIQtIqvo’ vIghoS. I’m on the path from the river. It’s probably a road that leads to the river, but I’m headed away from the river.

bIQtIqvo’ jIghoS. I’m on a path somewhere. The path is not called the “river path”. Maybe it has some other major destination. Maybe it doesn’t even touch the river. But the direction I’m traveling along that path increases the distance between me and the river.

bIQtIqDaq juHwIj vIghoS. I’m either on the path to my home, and the home is on the river, or I’m at the river, on the path to my home. There’s no real way to tell because “at the river” is not the location of me or the home. It’s the location of the action of going along the path that has a location of “river” and a destination of “home”. At some point along the travels, proximity to the river is implied.

It could even mean that I’m traveling along the river to my home. Maybe my home is on the river and I’m on a boat headed there. That’s perhaps the most likely interpretation of this.

juHwIjDaq bIQtIq vIghoS. I go along the river path to/at my home.

Okay. I’m confused now. Sometimes, efforts to explain things prove to me how much I DON’T know.

Anybody else want to clarify this mess?

pItlh
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv

> On Feb 25, 2016, at 11:37 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> thank you lojmIt tI'wI' nuv for replying ; I would like to write some
> thoughts on this subject. Please read on, and tell me whether my
> understanding is correct.
> 
> lojmIt tI'wI' nuv :
>> All three of the following are valid ways of saying the same thing:
>> HIghoS.
>> jIH HIghoS.
>> jIHDaq HIghoS.
> 
> I understand all these perfectly, because they follow the same rules,
> we had described in the {jaH} analysis. We have the imperative prefix
> {HI-} <you-me>, which (if we had jaH instead of ghoS) would specify
> that <you are going to me> (of course this would be an imperative
> because of the imperative HI-). We had said in the {jaH} analysis that
> when we use a prefix which specifies an object, then this means that
> the movement is towards the object and the placement of {-Daq} is
> unnessecary. So, in both the {jIH HIghoS} and {jIHDaq HIghoS} I
> understand that the meaning is the same and it is <approach me !>
> 
> So far so good.
> 
> I'm a little confused however as far as the {jIHvo' HIghoS} and
> {jIHvo' yIghoS} are concerned. If we accept that the same rules that
> apply to {jaH}, apply to {ghoS} as well, then here is my problem :
> 
> I can understand why the {jIHvo' HIghoS} means <go from me>. We have
> the {-vo'} along with the {HI-} prefix.
> 
> When we come though to the {jIHvo' yIghoS} we have a no object prefix
> ; so why can't this mean too that the <going away> doesn't nessecarily
> describe a movement that -with me stable- has the result of an
> increasing distance between me and the one who is moving, but rather
> as well the possibility that I'm here and that your <going away> is
> just taking place away from me ? Perhaps meaning that I'm here (in my
> bird of prey), and that your <going away> is taking place away from
> me, but it is not ME you're getting away from, but rather a romulan
> warbird.
> 
> I don't know if I'm making any sense. Perhaps I'm overthinking it.
> 
> mIv Hurgh qunnoq
> death while standing is preferable to life while kneeling
> 
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 1:56 PM, lojmIt tI'wI' nuv
> <lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com> wrote:
>> While what you say is technically true, unless context strongly suggests "from" most Klingon speakers would interpret {HIghoS} alone as "Approach me." Literally, it means something like, "Progress along the 'me' path," without saying which direction you should travel, but most commonly, paths are named after their destination.
>> 
>> All three of the following are valid ways of saying the same thing:
>> 
>> HIghoS.
>> jIH HIghoS.
>> jIHDaq HIghoS.
>> 
>> None of them are superior to the other. The redundancy of some is not bad or necessary. It is optional.
>> 
>> The only way to clearly say "Go from me," using {ghoS} is {jIHvo' HIghoS} or {jIHvo' yIghoS}. While the latter is a little odd, it is valid since you can {ghoS} without a direct object and the meaning of {-vo'} is clear enough. Doing the same with {-Daq} is weirder because it suggests that {jIH} is a zone large enough to contain the entire path.
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> lojmIt tI'wI' nuv
>> 
>>> On Feb 25, 2016, at 4:35 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> jIH :
>>>> jIHDaq HIghoS
>>> 'arHa' :
>>>> To me, approach me
>>> 
>>> Your translation 'arHa' confuses me and I would like to discuss it..
>>> The {jIHDaq HIghoS} means <To me, approach me>, or just <approach me>
>>> ? The verb {ghoS} can mean either <approach> or <go away from>
>>> depending on the presence of nouns with the suffixes {-Daq} and
>>> {-vo'}. The way to use ghoS (v) and other verbs of movement are
>>> described in HQ 7.4, p.2-12, Dec. 1998. Therefore I don't think that
>>> the translation of the {jIHDaq HIghoS} is <To me, approach me> (which
>>> would make the {jIHDaq} appear redundant, but just <approach me>. The
>>> {jIHDaq} not only it isn't redundant, but it is necessary to specify
>>> that the meaning of {HIghoS} is <approach me> and not <go away from
>>> me>.
>>> 
>>> mayqel mIv Hurgh qunnoq
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 7:23 AM, Robyn Stewart <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
>>>> vIlajQo’ jIH.  {vaHvo’ pu’HIch lel} boqelqangbe’’a’?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> From: Ed Bailey [mailto:bellerophon.modeler at gmail.com]
>>>> Sent: February 24, 2016 20:46
>>>> Cc: tlhIngan Hol mailing list
>>>> Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: Beginner's One-Sentence Story Game
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> jatlh 'arHa'
>>>> 
>>>> pu'HIchDaj vaHHa'choH be'. "SuvwI' jIH 'e' DalIj!"
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The woman unholstered a phaser pistol. "You forget I am a warrior!" (AFAIK
>>>> {vaH} is only a noun, but I like this because [1] Klingons mess with grammar
>>>> for effect, and this is effective, and [2] wotvaD DIp lo'lu'bogh lajrup
>>>> tlhIngan 'e' vIpIH.)
>>>> 
>>>> qaStaHvIS vagh lup veb, meH buy'moHtaH pu' tIHmey, nISwI' tIHmey, meQbogh
>>>> Ha'DIbaH pIw je.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> 
>>>> mIp'av yergho
>>>> bu''a'
>>>> baHwI'
>>>> IKAV chuch 'etlh
>>>> 
>>>> My modeling blog:          http://bellerophon-modeler.blogspot.com/
>>>> My other modeling blog:  http://bellerophon.blog.com/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>>>> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
>>>> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>>> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
>>> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
>> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160225/fed539d2/attachment-0001.html>