tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 09 11:38:52 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[none]
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: [none]
- Date: Wed, 9 Aug 1995 11:38:52 -0400
>([email protected])
Subject: Re: Re[8]: }}} Dialects (was:...
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Tue, 08 Aug 95 10:51:14 EST
>On Tue, 8 Aug 1995 ~mark wrote:
>>>bItuHmoH'egh. (As she shakes her finger at him.)
>>"-'egh" is a type-1 suffix, so it has to come first. "bItuH'eghmoH".
>>Yes, I know that sounds counter-intuitive, but the suffix-ordering is
>>fixed.
>Wait a second. <tuHmoH> is the verb "to shame". I can't believe that you break
>up words. I didn't want to say "You cause yourself to be ashamed."
I believe (and I think the general sense of the list on this has been in
agreement), that words like "tuHmoH" mean "to shame" because they mean "to
cause to be ashamed." There are many words listed in the dictionary that
are plainly ordinary compounds or suffixed words, and are only given
separate listings to make looking up concepts easier for English-speakers.
So "tuHmoH" + "-'egh" has to be "tuH'eghmoH", since "-moH" is a suffix, and
of a type that "-'egh" precedes.
>>This is okay for "You shame yourself"... but are you trying for "you should
>>be ashamed of yourself"? Maybe "bItuHnIS!" or "yItuH!" would work better.
>It was supposed to be "Shame on you." I figured "You shame yourself" was close.
>I think you are reading too much into it again. ;-)
"You shame yourself" is indeed reasonable for "Shame on you!" I was
exploring other possibilities, which sounded to me a little more
idiomatic. If, as in Klingon, the concept of "to be ashamed" is a single
unit, one verb, then "bItuHnIS" is a nice package for "You should be
ashamed." What does "Shame on you" mean? It sounds to me like "You are
deserving of shame..." I don't see much difference in basic meaning
between it and "You should be ashamed."
~mark