tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 07 23:37:44 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re[6]: }}} Dialects (was:...
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re[6]: }}} Dialects (was:...
- Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 22:37:44 -0500
Too much mail? Try the [email protected] version of this list!
~mark wrote:
>FWIW, the Hamlet translation calls the King "ta'" and the Queen "ta'be'". Yes,
>we know it sounds like "didn't accomplish." Life's rough.
r'Hul writes:
>"ta'be'" doesn't just sound like "didn't accomplish", it is it.
True only if it's a verb. If syntax requires a noun, it's a noun.
>Those of us
>just starting would see a verb & suffix and translate as such.
{naQmo'} is both "because of the staff" and "because it is whole". Again,
you'll have to use syntax to decide which makes sense.
>Also, to me, "emperor female" sounds strange.
Try instead "emperor's female" and it sounds much better. Remember that
Klingon puts two nouns together to indicate a possessive construction.
>I still don't see what is wrong with putting <be'> first.
There's nothing wrong with putting {be'} either first or second, except for
the lack of a good explanation for how to translate it as something other
than possessive. This sounds similar to the "appositive" problem where we
want to use two nouns as the subject or object of the same verb at the same
time.
>Call me a stubborn <be'targh> but I'm going to keep putting it in front.
I know what you mean by {be'targh}, but only because you've warned me.
It's an "unsafe" construction, not guaranteed to be understood.
-- ghunchu'wI'