[Tlhingan-hol] FW: {-meH}ed nouns

[mayql qunenoS]

ghItlhpu' Qov :

> Here's an article from HolQeD where they are touched on.
> http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file=1998-12-holqed-07-4.txt

Thanks for sharing. I will definitely study this carefully.

taH :

> You'll notice that you're starting to get multiple contradictory
> answers to some of your questions.

I have noticed that, and this is exactly what I like in the
discussions that are taking place here ; I believe that the best
process of learning, is actually for someone to try and analyze
different, even seemingly contradictory views on a subject. This is
the only way to excercise his judgement, learn, and eventually come to
a conclusion. Besides, the more teachers a student can have and learn
from, the more he will be able to learn and eventually benefit. Even
the borg never cease to constantly assimilate new and new (even
contradictory and opposite) civilizations !

..'ej *borg* chongqu'ghach vIHo'qu' 'e' wISov Hoch.
..and we all know, that I admire a great deal the thoroughness of the borg.

cpt qunnoq

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 6:06 AM, Robyn Stewart <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
> Just realized I inadvertently sent this this morning to qunnoq only, when I should let others participate in the conversation to ensure any errors I make are caught.
>
>> SuStel :
>>
>> > We have canon of the object of {ja'} being either the person
>> > addressed or the thing told about. I think it's likely that the
>> > thing told about is the direct object and the person addressed is
>> > the indirect object, but both are "objects" and can thus be plugged
>> > into the object position.
>>
>> So, this means I should write {vIleghDI', *purpose clause* 'oH
>> buvDaj'e', jIja'egh} ?
>
> Speech like that is special. You can put it before or after the verb ja' or jatlh (but not other verbs we might use in English like jach or tlhup or vIng or jang(*)).The words spoken in the attributed speech are not the object of the verb, so the no-object prefix is used. I have been advised by people reading my work that having words that are not part of the quote at both the beginning and end of the sentence is confusing, so they would prefer. {vIleghDI', jIja''egh, blah blah} OR {blah blah, jIja''egh, vIleghDI'}. We're now getting away from what is correct Klingon and what is enjoyable to read: the difference between learning grammar and learning effective communication.
>
> I interpret SuStel as confirming that ja''egh is okay. In fact yIja’‘egh "tell yourself!" is right in TKD, so there's no argument about that.
>
> ja' and jatlh can get quite complicated. Here's an article from HolQeD where they are touched on. http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file=1998-12-holqed-07-4.txt
>
> * jang we have been told is not used this way, but we have a canon joke where it is. So do we do what Marc says or what he does?
>
> I see that SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv are discussing this with you, so I leave you to it.
>
> You'll notice that you're starting to get multiple contradictory answers to some of your questions. It doesn't mean that any of the people answering are wrong--although sometimes we may be, and some of them think each other are. It's an indication that you're reaching some of the edges of the language. We've all read the canon, read each other's arguments, worked with the language and come to our own conclusions about what is understandable, what Marc and Maltz mean, what is the best way to feel that we are correct but to use the power of the language. At this point we should be showing you the canon and letting you decide for yourself, but there's a lot of it, and sometimes we don't actually remember all the thought processes and canon that went into our decisions, we just use them. Never hesitate to ask someone for the canon and or logic that underlies their position, and be prepared to stand back and watch what looks like a fight break out over a simple question. It's important to the language that the canon and logic get exercised and re-examined. As a new speaker be bold and look at the evidence and positions with fresh eyes, not knowing what bloody battles and personal insults have been exchanged over it. Figure out what you think and be prepared for a new argument, new canon or a new day to make you think something else. Write the best Klingon you can, and as in any language, the words and grammar you choose may be more conservative in certain situations.
>
>> jIH :
>>
>> > De' 'ut mulI'.
>> > they transmitted me the necessary data.
>>
>> I'm very happy to hear that the prefix trick here is correct. However
>> I need to ask..
>> I placed the {De' 'ut} before the {mulI'} so as to fit it in the object position.
>> While I was writing the sentence, I asked myself <what did they
>> transmit me ?>, and since the answer was <the necessary data>, I
>> placed it before the {mulI'} ; If I had placed it after the {mulI'},
>> would that be wrong ? I just want to make certain.
>
> Yes, it would be wrong. It would imply that the De' 'ut was transmitting you.  Remember that, with a few exceptions, only the OVS get to go at the end of the sentence. Everything else, including indirect objects, go before the OVS.
>
>> On one hand I am happy I learned it, on the other I'm wondering what
>> else is drifting in the vastness of Klingon space, cloacked,
>> undetectable to my sensors.. And the most ridiculous thing in this
>> situation is I don't know, how to ask about it ! How do I ask you to
>> explain to me, something I don't know its there ?
>
> You write things and you read things other people have written and you encounter things that are hard to say or hard to understand, and you say, "Hey! How does this work?"
> lultaHvIS qanwI'pu', DabejmeH bIba'taH . rInDI' may', pab lI' DaqormeH che'ron Da'el.
>
> - Qov
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol