tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 26 20:26:26 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Re: Nouns as Verbs
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Re: Nouns as Verbs
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 22:29:04 -0500
Daniel writes:
>HollanDaq bIghoS. *Ganja* qatlhIchqang.
>
>I know {tlhIch} is, but I couldn't find a verb that meant the same.
~mark was entirely too lenient on this, in my opinion. If you can't
find a translation for a word, *DON'T* make one up! Try to figure a
different way to say what you want; if you fail, it's okay to use the
english word. But try to get to the *meaning* you want to express!
To "smoke" a cigarette is a very complicated concept, involving fire,
burning leaves and paper, and breathing the resulting smoke. If you
don't want to get too detailed, the important part is {tlhIch tlhuH}.
Now for the rest of the problems. :-)
What's that first word? {Hollan}? Maybe "language-place"? {lan} is
a verb; {Daq} is the noun that means "site, location".... oops. From
the context, I gather you are talking about Holland. One missing "d"
and I'm off on a wild tangent. Never mind.
TKD 3.3.5 indicates that {HollandDaq bIghoS} is "somewhat redundant."
{ghoS} already carries with it the idea of its object being a location,
so {Holland DaghoS} would be more correct. But this sentence is just
a statement; did you intend it to be the command: "Go to Holland"? If
so, you need to use the appropriate imperative prefix (see TKD 4.1.2).
{*Ganja* qa*smoke*qang} is seriously weird. The only way to make sense
of it grammatically is if you're talking to Ganja: "Ganja, I'm willing
to smoke you." ~mark has already tried to help you with this; I'll get
into it as a response to a later note.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj