tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 20 01:22:23 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Mole's tale
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Mole's tale
- Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 01:22:18 -0800
At 05:39 97-11-04 -0800, Scott Murphy wrote:
}Why Mole Lives Underground, a Cherokee tale
}
}parbogh be' parHa' loD. tlho'Daj ghajmeH Hoch nID loD
I'd prefer {ghajchoHmeH} or {SuqmeH}. He tries to get it.
}'ach Qapla' ghajbe'
}ghaH. vaj loD tunglu' 'ej 'oH buSmo' rop ghaH.
He was sick or he got sick? {ropchoH} for the latter.
}paw *Mole* 'ej loD tunglu' 'e' legh ghaH. tlhob *Mole* qab nuq. lut naQ
}ja' loD. ja' *Mole* qaQaHlaH. DuparHa' be' 'ej DughoSqang be'.
}
}DaH 'oH ram.
This doesn't make sense. Do you mean "Now it is night"? The "it" there is
idiomatic and you'd have to say {DaH qaStaH ram} or {DaH SaH ram}. Do you
mean "Now it is trivial"? If so, remember your OVS and say {DaH ram 'oH},
but what is the antecedent of {'oH}?
}wutlh 'el *Mole*. pa' be' ghoS ghaH. Qong be'. tIqDaj lel
}*Mole*. chegh *Mole* 'ej loDvaD tIq nob *Mole*. ghopDajDaq 'oH tIq'a'
ghopDajDaq 'oH tIq'e'
}'ach 'oH leghlaHbe'. ja' *Mole* DaSop. vaj DughoSqangbej.
{yISop}. It's a command, right?
}tIq Sop loD. vem be' 'ej pay' loD buS ghaH. loD ghos neH be'. loD
{ghoS} must shift for {S}
}parmo' be' 'oH yajbe' ghaH.
There is no antecedant for {'oH} here. "It" is not used as vaguely in
Klingon as in English. Try for what I think you mean:
parmo' be' mIS loD - The man is confused because the woman dislikes him
par be' 'e' yajbe' ghaH - The man doesn't understand the woman's dislike for
him.
}loD tu' be' 'ej ja' be' qaparHa'. be'nallI'
}jIH jineH.
vIneH
}vaj loD nay be' 'ej be' Saw loD.
maj.
}quppu' lumerlu'. chay' qaSpu' 'e' luSovbe'. qaSmoHpu' *Mole* 'e' tugh
}luSov. laHDaj luneH. *Mole* luHoH lubuQ. So'meH wutlh 'el *Mole*. wej
}chegh ghaH.
}
}*** ADDENDUM - In defense of Question as Object usage
}
}You probably noticed that I use the sentence "chay' qaSpu' 'e' luSovbe'".
}I do this, knowing how controversial it is at the moment. However, I
}would argue that users of a language have a right to innovate new usages
}when they can find no other efficient way to say what they mean. "-bogh"
}would certainly not work here, as I am not referencing a noun but an
}action. As a linguist I am biased toward descriptive rather than
}prescriptive approaches to grammar.
Do remember that we are not native speakers. If we accept usage as it
occurs, e will quickly all speak a code for English, as that is the way the
majority of people use the language.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian