tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 02 10:21:36 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
"jIjach; bIjach"
- From: [email protected] (Steve Weaver)
- Subject: "jIjach; bIjach"
- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 13:21:18 -0500
On Thu, 2 Mar 1995 11:33:55 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]> replied to my AOL post:
>Umm... not really. "jIjach; bIjach" is okay, but the last bit doesn't
>work. Assuming you mean "majachchuq" (there's no "g" in Klingon)... it
>doesn't make sense: "we scream each other"? *Maybe* interpreted as "we
>scream at each other", but then what is "*ice cream*'e'"? It's not the
>object (it can't be, since -chuq verbs don't take objects). Actually,
>maybe it could be. If we can have "HIqaghQo' qara'pu'" (Okrandian
>example), using the prefix as a shorthand for "SoHvaD", maybe this could
>work the same way (we scream "ice cream" to each other). I'd not expect
>the "-'e'" on it, though.
>
>I might expect "*ice cream*mo' majach" or "*ice cream* wISuqmeH majach"
>perhaps.
"*ice cream*mo' majach" isn't what I was shooting for as it sounds to me
like, "we scream BECAUSE of the Ice Cream" ie, "The Ice Cream causes us to
scream" (hmmm ... DO klingons get brain freeze from eating ice cream too
fast??)
"*ice cream* wISuqmeH majach", "we scream because the ice cream is toxic".
Is ice cream toxic (*Suq*) to klingons??
What I was trying for was "we all scream 'ICE CREAM'", so Ice Cream becomes
the subject, no? The phrase "we all scream" is {majachchuq}, yes? (Yeah, I
transposed my handwritten "q" as a "g", {HIvqa' veqlargh}, thanks for
pointing that out).
jIjach
bIjach
*ice cream* majachchuq (???)
(we all scream "ice cream" (at each other, implied??))
B'Etter???? (sorry, hold over from another thread dealing with B'Etor and
B'Elanna) }};-)
Actually, I'm looking for "we all scream FOR ice cream", HIQaHqa'
qatlho'neS
vay' yIHub Hoch 'ej Hoch tIHub vay'
- DumaS
-------------------------------------------------
vIta'pu'be' !!! tlhIngan ghaH *Bart Simpson*'e'
Steve Weaver [email protected]