tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Aug 24 22:00:50 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: wI'oj?
Kenneth Traft writes:
> >>What about the use of {mamevQo'} in the anthem?
> >>It means "We won't stop." There's no object; {ma-}
> >>is correct here.
>In HolQeD Vol 6, No 2, Glen Proechel wrote "We won't stop the mission ...
>that
>the object prefix <wI-> be used instead of the simple prefix <ma->."
I'm not sure what Glen was looking at when he called what he was referring
to the "official" version of the lyrics; they hadn't yet been revealed to
us. The lyrics as presented on the Simon&Schuster KGT web page don't say
anything about "the mission"; likely Glen (or whoever recorded the lyrics
he was reading) misheard {maSuvtaHqu'} at the end of the previous line as
{maSuvtaH. Qu'...}.
The attempted transcription on page 18 of HolQeD 6:2 does have two errors:
{SeymoHchu'} should have been {SaymoHchu'} (parallelling the phonetic
error in the closed captioning "May" for {may}); and {vavpu'ma' DImuvpa'
reH maSuvtaHqu'} should be two sentences {vavpu'ma' DImuv} and {pa' reH
maSuvtaHqu'}.
>Is Marc
>Okrand capable of the most "elementary of "grammatical blunders" or is KGT
>telling us "HEY you can use it both ways with <ma-> or <wI>!!!!!!!"
He's certainly capable of blunders of many sorts, elementary or otherwise.
After all, he's only human. :-) But KGT specifically tells us that while
prefixes are occasionally misused, it is still considered an error.
>I only call 'em like I sees 'em!
But what are you looking at in this case? It appears to be someone else's
misinterpretation of what yet another person misheard from something sung
by a group of actors who were merely parroting sounds that they did not
understand. :-P
-- ghunchu'wI'