tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 14 22:15:19 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhIngan Hol chu' jIH
- From: [email protected] (HoD trI'Qal)
- Subject: Re: tlhIngan Hol chu' jIH
- Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 01:16:28 -0400
At 10:25 AM 8/14/96 -0700, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>>Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 22:11:25 -0700
>>From: [email protected] (HoD trI'Qal)
>
>>I wasn't sure if this was open to debate or not... so I took the liberty of
>>tossing in my $0.02, since Mark already replied. :)
>
>
>>At 07:31 AM 8/13/96 -0700, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>>>>Date: Sat, 10 Aug 1996 11:58:59 -0700
>>>>From: Randal Lanning <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>>At 11:29 AM 8/5/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>>
>>>Where "you"==Me, Mark Shoulson.
>>>
>>>> I was trying to say that "I am new to the Klingon language."
>>>>Although I have been studying the TKD for about a month now off and on, I
>>>>decided to write my first letter in it. I read the above as "I am a new
>>>>student to the Klingon language." Which if I have read it right, would be
>>>>correct also.
>>>
>>>Right, that's what I was saying. "New to..." is not really attested
>>>anywhere in known Klingon, and it's not clear how it would be done. Would
>>>the thing you're new to be the object of the verb "chu'" (as you have it)?
>>>Possibly, but I wouldn't guess it at first. And if it were, you'd have to
>>>put the right verb-prefix (presumably vI-) on the verb.
>
>
>>I'd re-cast:
>
>> DaH tlhIngan Hol vIghojchoH neH
>
>>The <DaH> is probably optional.
>
>Heh... That makes sense, but isn't necessarily what I'd start suggesting to
>a newcomer. Then again, it's not that complex.
Well, no, it's not... especially if you take out <DaH>.
It's also a good use of -choH, if I do say so myself. :)
*braces for flames*
>>>>>>Qu'wIj ghuntaHwI'
>>>>>
>>>>>Here too, "My task is a programmer..." You need 'oH....
>>>
>>>Oh, I certainly agree that "Qu'" is acceptable for "job" (I use it that way
>>>myself). The problem is that you need a verb (Qu'wIj 'oH ghunwI''e').
>>>Also, your job isn't a programmer, is it? Your job is a job, and jobs
>>>aren't programmers. Your job is *that of* a programmer, or *to be* a
>>>programmer, which would probably have to be expressed differently in
>>>Klingon.
>
>
>>I learned long ago from charghwI' to wince whenever I see a verb nominalized
>>and used in that "to be" construction:
>
>> jIvummeH jIghun
>
>>I'm not sure I like that though... other suggestions?
>
>Ow. I *do* sorta like it. The "ow" is because I didn't think of it.
>Still, it's a somewhat idiomatic use of "vum"; maybe better would be {Huch
>vIbajmeH jIghun}.
>
>~mark
I like yours even better, mainly because I didn't know about <baj> :(
majQa' to whoever came up with theidea of posting the new words to the
language on the webpages... they just became my bet friend, until I can ge a
new KD (no, I STILL haven't bought a new one yet, okay? :) )
--tQ
---
HoD trI'Qal, tlhIngan wo' Duj lIy So' ra'wI'
Captain T'rkal, Commander IKV Hidden Comet
Klingon speaker and net junkie!
HaghtaHbogh tlhIngan yIvoqQo'! toH... qatlh HaghtaH Qanqor HoD???
monlI'bogh tlhInganbe' yIvoqQo'! SoHvaD monlI' trI'Qal...