tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 22 07:03:58 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: My old neighbor
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: My old neighbor
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 10:03:16 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Mon, 21 Dec 1998 22:36:15 -0800 (PST) [email protected]
wrote:
> In a message dated 12/21/1998 3:18:14 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << qan/Qup = age
> ngo'/chu' = other stuff
>
>
> Let's say I wish to refer to someone as my old neighbor, referring to
> the fact that he's been my neighbor for a long time. Could I refer to
> him as a jIl ngo'? >>
>
> I am responding to this before reading what anyone else has said, because what
> I am about to say is also controversial:
>
> nI' = long (referring to the duration of time)
>
> thus, jIl nI'
>
> peHruS
Well, we can't tell for sure since we have not seen this useage
before, but it looks logical to me. I like it. I could see
either {ngo'} or {nI'} here depending on the shade of meaning
you want. In English, you could either say, "my old neighbor" or
"my long-time neighbor". In Klingon {ngo'} is not as ambiguous
as "old" in English, but if {nI'} can be used adjectivally to
describe an aspect of a noun which is not limited to time
related nouns, like {poH}, then this should work fine.
With the possible odd exception of {pegh}, which may indeed be
two separate verbs which sound alike and have similar but
different meanings, Klingon verbs can't take objects some of the
time and work adjectivally the rest of the time.
charghwI' 'utlh