tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 08 07:04:35 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon martial arts
- From: [email protected] (DaQtIq)
- Subject: Re: Klingon martial arts
- Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 07:03:50 -0800
ghunchu'wI' write:
> DaQtIq writes:
> >... I believe the reasoning was that because the english transalation
> >[of {tonSaw'}] ended in -ing, that it probably was a verb.
> I think you're remembering MY reasoning, but not my conclusion.
> In english, putting "-ing" on a verb makes it a noun. While the
> word "fight" is a verb, "fighting" is a noun. "Klingon fighting"
> is a kind of fighting; also a noun.
You are correct, after checking the archives i found the message (0111.html,
if you're interested) and my error came in translating the Klingon into
English. I got <DIp> & <wot> confused. HIvqa' veqlargh!
> A verb for "fight like a Klingon" probably would have been translated
> using the word "fight" without a suffix.
It is perfectly valid for one language to use a single verb stem to express a
action and another language needing an entire phrase to adequately translate
the action.
> >But since it has two
> >syllables it seems more nounlike to me as well.
> I don't follow this argument. Does {ghIpDIj} seem like a noun also?
It's not an argument, it's a generalization. My instincts tell me that there
are more two syllable simple nouns than two syllable verb stems.
None-the-less, i agree that <tonSaw'> is most likely a noun and i apologize
for my error which has festered for almost two months now. :)
- DaQtIq