tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 08 09:51:45 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "Qo'noS ta'puq, Hamlet lotlut. lut 'ay' wa', lut 'ay'Hom
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: "Qo'noS ta'puq, Hamlet lotlut. lut 'ay' wa', lut 'ay'Hom
- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1996 11:54:04 -0500
ghItlh peSHIr:
>DaHjaj pawpu' paqna' chovnatlhwIj 'e' vIparHa'qu'.
paqwIj je vIHevpu' 'ej jIQuch jIH je. rap qechwIj 'ach puj pabvam.
By using the verb suffix {-pu'} on the verb {paw}, you imply that the
book had already arrived when "today" occured. Its arrival appears to
be complete at the time the events in the rest of the sentence occur.
>paqna'vam luchenmoHpu'bogh tlhInganpu' vIHoy'qang!
toH! DaHoy'qangchugh vaj chaH yIHoy'!
>chuq lengpu'bogh bobuSchugh nI'Ha'law' lengpoH:
>*America*vo' *Netherlands*Daq lengpu' paqna' 'ej
>loSHu' neH chovnatlhwIj ngeHta' 'angghal!
lengmeH loS jaj neH poQ'a'? chaq qIgh lo'.
>mI' cha'vatlh cha'maH wej ngaS chovnatlhwIj.
>DaH ngoD Daj vISovqang: nuq mI' ngaS chovnatlhra'?
chovnatlhwIjDaq mI' wa'vatlh cha'maH cha' ghItlhlu'.
The translation of "what number" troubles me. I can't quite convince
myself that {nuq mI'} is the right way to say it, but I also can't come
up with a better way to express it.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj