tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 21 17:41:50 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: jIjang (Re: KLBC: HIboQqa' (cha'))

ghItlh Soqra'tIS:
>I take TKDs entry "vaj - so, then, thus, in that case (adv)" and similar
>definitions to mean EITHER of the meanings, based on context.

I, however, take the glosses to be restrictive.  I believe that {vaj}
has the meaning *common* to "so, then, thus, in that case."  Similarly,
I do not believe that {che'} "rule, reign, run" can mean the same kind
of "run" that {qet} "run, jog" does.  I think that one ought to be able
to pick any of the English definitions given in TKD for a Klingon word
and get the same meaning.  The only places where this isn't applicable
are the pronouns which in English have different forms for subject and
object use, and in Klingon are the same.

>So, to me, when I see an entry like: "vaj - so, then, thus, in that case
>(adv)", it tells me that {vaj} can be either of those words based on
>context of the text. Of course, I could be wrong in my assumption...
>
>                        choQIj

ghobe'.  qaQIjbe'.  bIQIj'eghnIS. :-)
You have said that I explain you.  Did you perhaps mean {jIHvaD yIQIj}?
If you want me to do something, use an imperative prefix.  If you want
me to explain something, don't tell me to explain *you*. :-)

>>>           qatlh 'e' DuQuchHa'moHlaw''a'
>>
>>If you use {qatlh}, you shouldn't also use {-'a'} unless you have a very
>>specific meaning in mind.  I've seen examples of their use together that
>>make some sort of sense, but this isn't one of them.
>
>Why not  ?

The verb suffix {'a'} turns a statement into a question.  It doesn't work
on a sentence that is already a question because of {qatlh} or {'ar} or
another question word.  You can think of it as something like this:
{Duj Dalegh} "You see the ship."
{Duj Dalegh'a'} "Is 'you see the ship' true?" or "Do you see the ship?"
{ghorgh Duj Dalegh} "When did you see the ship?"
{ghorgh Duj Dalegh'a'} "Is 'when did you see the ship' true?"  Dap 'oH.


>HIja'= yes, true {or YOU TELL ME!}
>HISlaH = yes, true
>HIja' HISlaH = yes true, rather than "yes, yes"

Hmm.  Actually, I read it more like "Yes, yep."  The two Klingon words
have the same meaning; using them together just sounds confusing to me.

>{'e'} is a BIG problem with me. I just can't seem to get it and KEEP it
>streight in my head ( right charghwI' ?? }};-)  ).

It's easy. :-)  TKD 6.2.5 "Sentences as object" says {'e'} and {net} are
special pronouns which refer to the entire previous sentence.  They are
*always* the object of the verb, and they are treated as third-person
singular (like "him, her, it") when choosing the verb prefix.

{Duj Dalegh} "You see the ship."  This is a simple sentence.
{ngoDvam vISov} "I know this fact."  This is also simple.
{Duj Dalegh 'e' vISov} is effectively two sentences: "You see the ship;
I know that."  It can be stated as "I know that you see the ship."
{Duj vIlegh 'e' DaHar} "You believe that I see the ship."
{Duj tIj ghaH 'e' Hech} "He intends that he boards the ship."
(or "He intends to board the ship.")

>>>                <...vIteqlu'pu'...>
>>
>>nuqjatlh?  "I have been taken off."  Sorry, I don't understand this at all.
>
>I'm using it for <...SnIp...>, "I have been removed"

"I have been removed" and "I have been taken off" mean exactly the same
thing to me.  I would say "I have cut" or "it has been cut", or a simple
clipped {pe'} or even {poD}.  [By the way, I find English words with
Klingon spelling conventions distracting and confusing.]

-- ghunchu'wI'               batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj

Back to archive top level