tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Apr 11 09:44:27 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

My first try at tlhIngan Hol KLBC

Hello Klingonists!

I have followed the discussions on this mailing list for some time now. I am
impressed by how adequately some of you use the language. Let me introduce
myself with  my first ever message in Klingon. I hope I did not make too
many mistakes in it (If I did I will certainly hear from you :-) but learn
from them at the same time :-):

ghon van HI'rIp pongwIj. tera'ngan jIH. *Holland*Daq jIyIntaH. wejmaH jav
DIS vIghaj. Holmey Daj 'e' vIQubmo' tlhIngan Hol vIghojtaH. jIQapDI' Hap
QeDpIn jIH. *bIl 'elbIrt* loSvaDwI'. vengHomDaq *Vlaardingen* pongta'bogh
mayIntaH. *Holland*vo' jIH. *bIl* 'ach *'AmerIqa*vo' ghaH. 

(Back to English) 

I am studying Klingon seriously for a few weeks now, using the texts
downloaded from the KLI's FTP server in conjunction with  Dr. Okrand's
Klingon Dictionary. I started by translating  the Fables and observe how the
language works to express ideas and statements. I have some questions now
about one of these texts  (the *Fox and the Crow*). I will paste the text
into this message as I downloaded it and insert my questions at the
appropriate place.

>juHvo' Soj nIH chalHa'DIbaH
>SorDaq puvpu' chalHa'DIbaH
>jIvalchugh Sojvetlh vISop jatlhegh chalHa'DIbaH leghpu'bogh Ha'DIbaH
>poHvaD Qubpu'
When I attempted to analyze *poHvaD*, TKD told me that the suffix -vaD means
'for' 'intended for'.
implying that the noun to which -vaD is attached to is the beneficiary of
the action. So far so good but that would mean that  *poH* would somehow
benefit from the *Qub*, which I dare doubt. My question is: is this a
correct use of the -vaD suffix to denote time durations? If not, would
something like "poH juSDI' " = "while a period of time passed" be appropriate? 
>chalHa'DIbaHDaq nuQneH jatlhneS Ha'DIbaH
I treated *nuQneH* as a typo for *nuqneH*. If that is not correct, what does
*nuQneH* mean?

>DaHjaj bI'IHneS
>monglI' 'IH law' Hoch 'IH puS
>tellI' HoS law' Hoch HoS puS
TKD tells me the *-lI'* suffix is only used for nouns which denote beings
capable of using language. For other beings and inanimate objects, *-lIj*
should be used. 
Should'nt this then read *monglIj* and *tellIj* (and further on *nujlIj* and
*'IHghachlIj*?) or could this be special usage to be extremely polite (as
the use of the  *-neS* suffix  in this text indicates)?
>ghogh ghajchugh Hoch bel 'e' DIch jIH
>Dochmeyvam jatlh Ha'DIbaH
>'IHpu' ghogh 'e' naDmo' cha'bej chalHa'DIbaH
>nujlI' poSmoHDI' ghorDaq chaghpu' Soj
>nom Soj tlhap Ha'DIbaH
>'IHghachlI' vIjatlhlaw' 'ach yab vIjatlhbe'bej 

I would really appreciate any answers about these issues (preferably in
English, still, although tlhIngan Hol would provide me with more exercise
material ;-))

Happy Easter to all of you!

ghon van HI'rIp

"bIlujlaHbe'chugh bIQaplaHbe'"

Back to archive top level