tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 12 16:02:33 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Barrows 'uQ
- From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Barrows 'uQ
- Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 16:04:57 -0700 (PDT)
---"Lt. Cdr. Sarah Barrows" wrote:
> 'uQwIj
> Delchugh tera'ngan, *chicken* *french fries* je vISop 'e' jatlh.
Oh oh. We hammered on this one too hard and it went out the other
side? Section 6.2.5: /jatlh/ doesn't use /'e'/.
> ?rInpa' vutlu' Ha'DIbaH, *oven*-vo' tI vIlel. rIn vutlu' tI, vaj
...
> pabpo'pu'vaD: The question-mark phrase: /?rInpa' vutlu' Ha'DIbaH/ is
> meant to mean, "Before the meat was finished cooking." I'm not certain
> this is grammatically legal/correct, and I'm too lazy to -- I mean,
if I
> look it up in my TKD my dinner will get cold. Yeah. Please advise.
Okay, here's some logic you can use to see why your instincts
correctly told you it didn't work:
/rIn/ does mean "be finished" but its subject should be a noun, or a
noun phrase. Klingon, as you know, doesn't have a standard "sentence
as subject" construction. Leave /rIn/ to describe the completion of a
noun, e.g. /rIn may'/, /rIn much/, /rIn 'uQ/.
The subject of a verb with /-lu'/ is always indefinite. That means
that there shouldn't be a noun (like Ha'DIbaH or tI) sitting after it,
in its subject slot.
How to fix it?
There are three suffixes in Klingon useful for talking about completion.
/-chu'/, /-ta'/ and /-pu'/. The suffix /-chu'/ doesn't always imply
completion, it depends a lot on the verb. /vutchu'/ could mean
"prepare to perfection" "cook through" even "cook to death." /-ta'/
and /-pu'/ always imply completion.
So a possibility is:
Ha'DIbaH vutlu'chu'pa' - before the meat is/was completely cooked
tI vutlu'pu' - the greens were done cooking/will be done cooking
In English the greenery is the subject of that sentence. In Klingon
they are the object.
==
Qov - Beginners' Grammarian
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com