tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 24 05:25:52 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} KLBC: wamwI'
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }} KLBC: wamwI'
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 95 9:25:52 METDST
> > pemHovvaD vanDaj nobpu'DI' Dechbogh puH ghoSchoH
> > Ha'DIbaH wamlu'bogh SamlI'meH
>
> Only one small error that I can detect. Purpose clauses with {-meH}
> always preceed the noun or main verb whose purpose they are describing.
> (Sec. 6.2.4.)
>
grrr... I just didn't think that -meH could be
different from -DI' etc. in this respect and I wanted
to seperate the two dependent clauses...
> Note that Klingon does have a word for countryside {Hatlh}.
> I don't really know what the differency between {Hatlh} and {puH} is but
> if I were to hazard a guess, I suspect {Hatlh} may refer to a rural
> area of land and {puH} may be a more generic term.
>
thank you!
that's one reason I'm trying to translate TKD...
there are so many possible expressions in English
for what I want to say, which just don't come to
my mind :(
> > (ghoS is listed as 'go away from' [amongst others],
> > do I need to add naDevvo'?, do I need to add -Daq
> > to the destination with this meaning?)
>
> If you use {ghoS} to mean "to approach" you don't need {-Daq}. (TKD p. 28)
yes. but do I need it when ghoS is to be 'go away'?
e.g. HuD(Daq?) nadevvo' jIghoS
'I'm leaving for the mountains'
in summary, how about
pemHovvaD vanDaj nobpu'DI'
Ha'DIbaH wamlu'bogh SamlI'meH
nadevvo' ghoSchoH 'ej Dechbogh HatlhDaq leng
(is it clear that the dependent clauses
refer to S1 'ej S2, or would one be confused
by the possibility that they only refer to
naDevvo' ghoSchoH?)
Marc
--
----------------------------------------------------
Marc Ruehlaender [email protected]
Universitaet des Saarlandes, Saarbruecken, Germany
----------------------------------------------------