tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 02 09:14:10 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: baS tuj pe'wI'



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 03:14:55 -0700
>From: "A.Appleyard" <[email protected]>

>  ghItlhpu' "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>:-
>> meQSIp?  burn-gas? ... Methane?  Hydrogen?  Oh, acetylene? ...

>  Any inflammable gas. In that case, it was hydrogen, as acetylene cylinders
>must always be kept valve up (see any industrial gases safety manual).

Fair enough, though particularly since it's indefinite, "meQbogh SIp" would
make more sense.  Compound words in Klingon appear to refer to specific
things, while N-N or relative clauses are more general.  Uuuh, what does
valve position have to do with anything?

>  (yInSIp tlhejchugh) acetylene hydrogen pagh baS tuj pe'wI' qulHom tuj
><be_fast> je law'; propane baS tuj pe'wI qulHom tuj <be_fast> je puS 'ej neH
>pe'laH 'a <weld>laHbe'. 'a neH propane Qutlh law' latlhmeyvetlh Qutlh puS.

I assume you mean "ghap" instead of "pagh"?  You're conjoining the nouns,
right?

"If aceylene or hydrogen accompanies oxygen, the blowtorch's flame is
hotter and faster"?  If so, you're conjoining the verbs "tuj" and
"<be_fast>" with a noun conjunction "je".  If not, I don't understand what
the "je" is doing there.

"neH" as an adverbial is unusual and does NOT come at the beginning of a
sentence, but follows the noun (to mean "only") or verb (to mean
"merely").  I guess it should be "pe'laH neH, 'ach muvmoHlaHbe'" (though I
do not fault you for using "<weld>", since "muvmoH" is pretty weak).  Same
with the next sentence "propane neH qutlh law'..."  I think it's qutlh, not
Qutlh.

># (1) nuv DubDaq yInSIp-meQSip baS tuj pe'wI' 'e' Sip ngaSwI'mey qenglu'bogh
># tu'lu' 'e' Qoypu''a' vay'?
>> I really can't parse this sentence ...

>  The clauses separated are:-
>  nuv DubDaq yInSIp-meQSip baS tuj pe'wI' Sip ngaSwI'mey qenglu';
>  pe'wI' <of type described in the previous clause> tu'lu' 'e' Qoypu''a' vay'?
>    {yInSIp-meQSip baS tuj pe'wI' Sip ngaSwI'mey} is a noun-chain, which the
>relative clauses's referent was in the middle of, so I had to insert the 'e'
>inside it.

But the pronoun "'e'" separates clauses by indicating that the first is the
object of the second?  Have you confused the pronoun with the suffix
"-'e'"?  I can't think of any situation in which "'e'" would be followed by
anything but a verb or an adverbial.  I'm not sure you can refer to the
first N in an N-N construction as the head-noun of a relative clause; I
know Nick Nicholas wrote an article about this a while ago in HolQeD, and I
think Okrand spoke against it in his interview in another issue.  I still
can't parse this sentence as you have it.

>>  I note that 'angghachDaq is highly marked ...

>  It seemed to me the most compact way to express "a display" as a noun.

Well, we now have the word "bey'" from the CD-ROM which seems to mean
something similar.  Maybe not quite right either.  Nonetheless, we know
that -ghach on a bare verb isn't normal Klingon, period.

>  {Dat 'oH vIqenglaH!} is not quite true as it stands: I can't acually carry
>one, because I haven't got one and have no access to one! Here I needed a
>"hypotheticalness" suffix or particle to turn the meaning into "I would be
>able to carry it." with an implied condition ("if I had one", here). It would
>be useful if Marc Okrand could reveal a "hypotheticalness" alias "unreal
>condition" suffix or particle; many languages have a specific construction for
>implied and explicit unreal conditions.

And many don't.

"wa' vIghajchugh, Dat 'oH vIqeng!"  The "could" in English indicates
hypotheticalness, but not ability.  -laH is definitely not called for here
(note that "would" is almost the same in English in this sentence).  The
Hebrew translation, for example, would not have any reference to ability
(hayiti loqeach...).

~mark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMgIpNsppGeTJXWZ9AQEtPgL9F5CGF4BEcilqeo0Yz6aBtUUYQ2lzbCoF
UezzHTHV42Tdd6/9mNt/nhKkLUjuH+GyPuklsEMhQkMyTa2pwCDNMGRiUGkYX2Ix
sXC6KS6l/OrxbD290p3H7JCk1nTLn/HF
=WVIY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Back to archive top level