tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Feb 01 21:55:56 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: QonoS baroS ra'wI' QIv
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: QonoS baroS ra'wI' QIv
- Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 21:54:52 -0800
At 21:27 98-01-31 -0800, Lt. Barrows wrote:
}DaHjaj ngoDmey Daj puS vIghoj.
KGT (p.82) teaches us that we may not string adjectives together in Klingon.
Write it as {Dajbogh ngoDmey puS} or {Dajbogh ngoDmey 'ej puSbogh}.
}romuluSngan mep muSHa'qu' *Horta*pu'.
Hortas really love Rihannsu plastics??
(If you meant plastic as singular the {lu-} prefix is required to indicate a
plural subject with singualr object.)
}romuluSngan mep SopDI' *Horta*pu', chechqu'choH. munuQqu' chech *Horta*pu'.
Ah, jIyaj. But a bad adjective placement: {*Horta*pu' chech}
}De' De'wI' wISuqmeH, yuQDaq chegh *BJ*, *Michael*, jIH je.
In order to get an information computer? What's that? {machegh} - if a group
includes your self, the group is first person plural.
}De'wI' ghoS *Michael*, 'ej loSnIS *BJ* jIH je.
{maloSnIS}
}Dal. qay'choH jabbI'ID, vaj *Michael* rI' *BJ*.
"Data transmission became a problem." Hmm.
In English "transmission" is both some data that has been transmitted and
the act of transmitting it. (It's an engine part, too, but I've not yet
seen someone try to use jabbI'ID that way.) I suspect that the same word in
Klingon doesn't cover both the act and the result. For the act I woud go
for {lI'taHghach} or {labtaHghach}. That's really what {-ghach} is good
for: nominalizing a process, and you get to be specific about whether it's
incoming data or outgoing data that is being dropped. You're also free to
argue for {jabbI'ID}. I don't know this one.
}jangbe' *Michael*. vaj jatlh *BJ*, <DaqDaq *Michael* HIjol!>.
{jol} is beam aboard. Is the order supposed to be. "Beam me [away] to
Michael's location," "Beam Michael [aboard] to the location," or what. I'm
a little confused here.
"Beam me to Michael's location" would be {*Michael* DaqDaq HIQol}
"Beam Michael aboard" would be {Michael yIjol!}
}vIlob. yabwIjDaq *Michael* vIQoychoH. motlhbe'law'. *Michael* QumlaHbe'law'
}*BJ*.
Qum is communicate, not communicate with. {*Michael*vaD QumlaHbe'} would do it.
}<lupDujHomDaq *Michael* yIjol!> rI' *BJ*.
That one makes clear sense. I accept {rI'} as a verb of saying in this context.
}*Michael* vIcheghmoH.
}lupDujHom SopchoH! mev vIra', 'ej mev. jabbI'ID rInmoH *BJ*, 'ej vIcheghmoH.
Same comment on {jabbI'ID}. You could say here {De' lI'chu' *BJ*} or
another verbal construction indicating complete sending, rather than using a
noun to describe an action.
}yabwIjDaq vIngchoH *Michael*. munuQqu'! nom yuQ wImej.
}Do', lupDujHom QIjqu' *Michael* 'ej *Shiloh*Daq macheghlaH.
lupDujHom SeHlaHbe'mo' nagh QIjnIS'a'?
}*Michael* chechmoH romuluSngan mep 'e' vItu'.
}
}vIngqu'pu'mo', *Michael*vaD
}romuluSngan mep vISuq 'e' vIlay'.
Horta are telepaths, I take it?
}loQ neH vInobnISbej!
neH can modify a verb or a noun. {loQ} is an adverb. I assume you're
saying "I'll have to give him only a little!" Try "mep puS neH vInobnISbej!"
} I used to submit an English
} meaning with my tlhIngan posts, but I'm conceited enough to think that my
} tlhIngan Hol is good enough by now that I don't need one.
It's a good idea to always submit a translation anyway if you are sending
something for assessment. While your work is certainly readable, there may
be times when you said something that was grammatically correct, but not
quite the shade you intended. The BGs give a translation when they have an
idea for a construction they want comment on: it's not a measure of skill,
but a measure how closely you ant the work scrutinized. As a compromise you
could just provide the English for phrases that could be ambiguous.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian