tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 15 21:43:12 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: A few phrases.
Patrick Masterson jang pagh:
>> The truth is out there: voghDaq vIt tu'lu'
>Do you even need <vogh> here? If you decide you do, I would be strongly
>tempted to treat the <vogh> like <Dat>, <pa'>, and <naDev> and omit the
><-Daq>. We don't have canon (that I know of) to support this, but I cannot
>believe that <vogh> does not behave like <Dat>.
I can believe it either way, and I will accept it either way without
complaint. But I find myself avoiding the use of {vogh} because I don't
know which way is correct.
>> "We are not who we are.": maHbogh maHbe'
>Oh, my. This is a tough one. It's really playing with language in a way that
>does not translate well. Perhaps <marur'eghchu'be'>, or some variation
>thereof. Perhaps <majech'eghtaH>. What you have just bends my mind. See if
>you can come up with any other ideas.
All I can come up with is {maH'eghbe'}. I think putting {-'egh} on a
pronoun rather effectively captures the warped idea behind this phrase.
-- ghunchu'wI'