tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 21 18:34:42 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC [repost] - lutHom
Please:Stop sending me your mail:Thank You!!!
Please Remove This Address : [email protected]
We were flamed,Please forward the name and address of the mailing list that
you're on,so we can get off of it!!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of
> Andeen, Eric
> Sent: Monday, December 21, 1998 8:23 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: RE: KLBC [repost] - lutHom
>
>
> Thanks for using NetForward!
> http://www.netforward.com
> v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v
>
> lab Matt Johnson:
>
> > Savan.
>
> > pagh, yIlaD 'ej yIlughmoH -- jIchu'taHvIS,
> > jIDubmeH jIghojnISqu'taH.
>
> > ===
> > lutHom 'oH.
>
> > nom meHDaq De'wI' ghun QeDpIn.
> maj.
>
> > pay' tlhopHomDaq So'Ha'law'pu' romuluSngan veSDuj 'e' jatlh ya.
>
> I really don't know why you used <tlhopHom> here. I would use <Duj tlhop>.
>
> You're also trying to do an indirect qoute with <jatlh>, and we don't have
> any evidence that you can do that. <jatlh> only works with direct quotes,
> and you can put the quote before or after the <jatlh (subject)>.
>
> pay' Duj tlhopDaq So'Ha'law'pu' romuluSngan veSDuj jatlh ya.
>
> > HaStavaD mutlhob HoD.
>
> I don't understand what you're saying here. Is the captain asking
> about the
> display? If he's commanding you to put up a display, I would say < <HaSta
> yIcha'!> ra' HoD>. If it is the tactical display, replace <HaSta> with
> <wIy>. And this is also a good place for Clipped Klingon, so you can drop
> the <yI-> prefix if you want to.
>
> > jIHeQta' 'a pagh tu'lu'!
>
> This is not a good place for <-ta'>. It's better without the
> aspect suffix.
>
> > pIHbej HoD.
>
> maj. Good use of the other meaning of <pIH>.
>
> > wIyDaj 'olqa' 'e' ya ra' HoD.
>
> This doesn't quite work. I would use the same structure as in
> <HaSta yIcha'>
> above:
>
> yavaD <wIy yI'olqa'> ra' HoD.
>
> > bejpu' ya.
>
> Again, you don't need the aspect suffix. When the action happens, the
> tactical officer *is examining* the display. If you add <-pu'>, you are
> saying that the officer *had already finished examining* the
> display. Do you
> see the difference?
>
> > QeDpInvaD yIt 'ej ngoqDaj ghun vInuD.
>
> For "I walked", you need the right prefix: <jI->. You should also use the
> suffix <-Daq> - you are walking to the location of the officer,
> not walking
> for his benefit.
>
> <ngoq> is defined as "code", but I don't think it can apply to what
> programmers produce all day. When interpreting the meanings in
> TKD, you have
> to be as narrow as possible, and only choose the primary meaning
> of a word.
> So a "code" is a system for encrypting information. The <ghun>
> after <ngoq>
> really doesn't work either.
>
> I would just say <De'wI'Daj vInuD> here.
>
> > muHaghmoH!
>
> Do'Ha' ya. tlhIbba'.
>
> > mujchu' ngoqqoqDaj.
>
> Same comments as above about <ngoq>. In this case, I would say
> <ghunHa'qu'ba'>. It's a different way of phrasing it, but it's a more
> Klingon way. Instead of concentrating on the thing (noun) that got screwed
> up, you are concentrating on the action (verb) of screwing up.
>
> > veSDuj tu'lu'be'bogh leghmoH!
>
> I would have said <tu'be'lu'bogh> here, but I won't say yours is wrong.
> Okrand has said there is a difference between <-lu'be'> and <-be'lu'>, but
> he has not told us exactly what it is, and I'm not going to speculate on
> what it might be - not today, anyway.
>
> > QeHqu' HoD. QaghmeyDajmo', bIghHa'vaD QeDpIn ngeH HoD.
>
> I would probaly say <ya Qaghmo'> instead of <QaghDajmo'> since
> there are two
> "s/he"'s floating around in this sentence, and it's clearer to
> specify which
> one. I also don't see multiple errors, but I suppose that depends
> on how you
> count, so the plural is fine.
>
> Same comments about <-vaD> and <-Daq>: <bIghHa'Daq>.
>
> > ===
>
> > DaH, DIvI' Hol De' qanob.
>
> > On the bridge, the science officer was programming the computer
> > quickly. Suddenly, the tactical officer said that a Romulan
> > warship apparently decloaked right in front of them. The captain
> > asked me for visual. I complied, but there was nothing there!
> > The captain was certainly suspicious. He ordered the tactical
> > officer to recheck his display. The tactical officer was sure.
> > I walked to the science officer and checked his programming.
> > It made me laugh! It was clearly wrong. It caused him to see a
> > warship that was not there! The captain was angry. Due to his
> > errors, he sent the science officer to the brig.
>
> > ====
> > Questions:
>
> > I noted all manner of arguments about reported speech in the FAQ.
> > Does my second sentence work?
>
> Not really. See my suggestion.
>
> > Sentence 4: I think I'm looking for a sentence as an indirect
> > object... can I get away with what I've done?
>
> Same deal.
>
> > Sentence 6: Hacked it about to avoid ambiguity. Does {ngoqDaj
> > ghun} work for 'his programming'? I don't think you'll like
> > the way I used {ngoq}... (}}8-)
>
> bIlughchu'. In Klingon, it's almost always better style to use descriptive
> verbs than to use lots of nouns and generic verbs like <ghaj>, <Hutlh>,
> <muj>, etc.
>
> In English, you would say "His answer was wrong". In Klingon you would say
> <jangHa'>.
>
>
> pagh
> Beginners' Grammarian
>