tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 17 07:56:14 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: easy sentences

> > 2. This suitcase is mine.
> >    DochwIj 'oH lengwI' ngaSwI'vam'e'.
> I believe that Okrand used {tep} in Conversational Klingon, but
> I'm not sure. Realize that the term "cargo" would include both
> the carrier AND its contents, while your statement might be

I see. I'd have thought of "cargo" as being ONLY the content,
but on the other hand I was aware that "suitcase" ONLY means
the container...
> answered by the guards dumping out the contents and giving you
> back your empty container, which you seemed to want. Meanwhile,
> your term DOES kinda sound like a small cage for one traveler.
> 
> Anyway, I'd just say {tepwIj 'oH Dochvam'e'}.

What I mainly wanted to know: can you put the emphasise on
MINE the way I did?
> > 5. This is where I work.
> >    DaqvamDaq jIvum.
> 
> It would be much better to use {naDev} than {DaqvamDaq}.

Wouldn't naDev require me to be where I'm talking about?
So if I'm only pointing at it, can I still use "here"?
> > 6. There was a large crowd.
> >    DaqvetlhDaq ghom'a' tIn tu'lu'.
> 
> It would be much better to use {pa'} than {DaqvetlhDaq}. This
> is a fine use of {tIn}. Also, this would more accurately be
> something like, "A large crowd was over there," since your
> English sentence sounds too much like the more idiomatic,
> "There was an old woman who lived in a shoe..." which has
> nothing to do with "there" as a specific location.

I didn't think of pa'. I see it would be better. However
I don't understand what you're saying next. Do you mean
that pa' does not refer to a specific location, but
Daqvetlh does. (By the way I only put it in my sentence
because I felt like a place adjunct was required. The
"there" of the original is taken care of by tu'lu', isn't
it?)
> > 7. It was impossible to go further.
> >    DuHbe' Duvqa'ghach.
> 
> This might work, but it sounds cranked a little towards being
> idiomatic to English. I'd expect something more like
> {maDuvqa'laHbe'}. Klingons tend to like to describe the action
> less in the abstract ("to go further"? For WHO to go further?)
> and more in the concrete. The verb {DuH} belongs more to nouns
> like {Qu'} than to verb phrases packed into noun forms.

Does this mean that you "can't" say (in the sense that it's
not good Klingon) it's impossible for ANYONE? WHOEVER gets
there will find it so?
I'd have used -laH if one could combine it with -lu'
however, so I used DuH and -ghach to express a general
"one cannot".
> > 8. It was a pity the weather was so bad.
> >    QaHHa'laHpu' SuSmey. vaj moghnISlu'.
> 
> "The wind was able to hinder. So one needs to be frustrated."?

I wanted to say: "The winds turned unable to help." that's
why I used -Ha' - bad luck it's only a rover by name }}:-{
And yes, I thought "one has to be frustrated" is a way
to express "it's a pity". I was thinking about 'IQ instead
of mogh but rejected it, because it seemed too sentimental.
> 
> HoSqu'mo' SuS maDo'Ha'.
> 
> "Because the wind was strong, we were unlucky."
> 
> or
> 
> SuS HoSqu'mo' maDo'Ha'.
> 
> "Because of strong wind, we were unlucky."

This would mean, that you set out to do it, but the wind
spoilt it, right? I understand the original, that because
of the weather you didn't even start to do it.

> 
> I'm not certain whether or not {SuS} is a word that would
> normally be pluralized. Does it refer to a single gust, or to
> wind in general?
> 
What makes you think it can't be both?

			Qapla'
				Marc 'Doychlangan'

--
----------------------------------------------------
Marc Ruehlaender	[email protected]
Universitaet des Saarlandes, Saarbruecken, Germany
----------------------------------------------------

Back to archive top level