tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 24 12:26:35 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
KLBC: Trial and error
- From: "AdmiralTAG" <[email protected]>
- Subject: KLBC: Trial and error
- Date: Mon, 24 Jun 1996 22:31:51 +0000
- Comments: Authenticated sender is <[email protected]>
- Priority: normal
QaghmeywIj vIchID vIyoH
<I have the courage to admit my mistakes>--glaring though they
may be...
ghunchu'wI' corrected:
> >lajbeHbe' juhwIj [My house is not prepared to
> >welcome them.]
> "My house is not set up to accept..." accept what? I think a
> sentence like this calls for at least a pronoun to resolve the
> ambiguity of the null verb prefix. {chaH} at the beginning
> would clarify it a lot.
OK, so let me try one on for size:
wIbach HIchwIj 'e' maH ghojmoH
<I taught us to shoot my gun>
> >juhwIj vISay'be' [I do not clean my house for them]
> "I am not clean my home." {Say'} means "be clean"; "clean"
> would be {Say'moH} "cause to be clean". There's nothing in the
> Klingon that says "for them" -- to add it, you would put
> {chaHvaD} at the front.
maHvaD nIch vIje'
<I buy ammunition for us>
> >batlh jIvangbe' [I have misplaced my honor]
> "I do not act with honor." It's an okay translation of the
> idea, but why do your english words differ so much from the
> Klingon ones?
I honestly can't remember--that punishment with the midsifter
took a lot out of me...
> >jIpwIj 'oH bIj Hegh ghap [Punishment or death is my penalty]
> In a "to be" sentence, an explicit subject must have the suffix
> {-'e'}. This is probably open to debate, but I think each of
> the nouns in the combination should get {-'e'} individually
> rather than trying to put a noun suffix on a conjunction.
ghojmoHwI' bach 'e' mughwI' 'e' jIH
<I am a gun instructor and translator>
> The adverb and verb meanings are obviously distinct; the issue
> must be what, if anything, distinguishes the noun meanings.
> I see them like this: {batlh} refers to the code of actions
> that define the behavior of an honorable warrior. {quv} refers
> to something like a gesture of respect or a token of esteem
> which causes someone to be honored.
Then <quv Hutlh Hohbogh tlhIngan 'ach qabDaj 'angbe'bogh> means
that others will confer no honor on one who kills without
showing his face? I know you said your distinctions are not
canon, but I'd like to hear how you interpreted the gloss to
come to them.
~Doq