tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 02 19:16:30 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "jIjach; bIjach"
>Date: Thu, 2 Mar 1995 14:03:36 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: [email protected] (Steve Weaver)
>On Thu, 2 Mar 1995 11:33:55 -0500
>"Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]> replied to my AOL post:
>>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??)
I was sort of thinking of a meaning behind "for ice cream." What does it
really mean? It's not very clear. It might mean "We scream for ice cream"
as in "when ice cream is brought, we scream"; thus, we scream because of
ice cream. It's one way of looking for at at it.
>"*ice cream* wISuqmeH majach", "we scream because the ice cream is toxic".
>Is ice cream toxic (*Suq*) to klingons??
Erm, no. "We scream in order that we obtain (Suq) ice cream." Where did
you see a "because" there?
>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).
Why bother with the "-chuq" then? Why not "<*ice crem*> wIjach"?
> jIjach
> bIjach
> *ice cream* majachchuq (???)
>(we all scream "ice cream" (at each other, implied??))
Not implied: explicit. But I wonder why.
~mark