tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 06 21:22:23 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: veqlargh paq
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: veqlargh paq
- Date: Fri, 06 Feb 1998 21:21:14 -0800
At 15:58 98-02-06 -0800, 'elren wrote:
}wej
} qo' SovtaHghach vIqaDmeH jIQam 'ej qeyleS chatmey quvchetmey je vIyu'.
} I stand in order to challange the knowledge of the world.
Ther is nothing in the translation that indicates it is the process of
continuously knowing, not simply the knowledge that you challenge. Unless
there's something you are not telling me, use the noun {Sov} instead of
{SovtaHghach}.
You've got me on TWO vocabulary words. I don't know {chat} or {chet}. here
did you get these words? Another reason to give me translations. Assuming
that {chat} and {chet} are valid nouns, you have "I interrogate Kahless'
*chat*s and honourchets."
}loS
} che'taHghachlIj meqmey vItlhob
}4
} I request the reasons of your rules
The noun "rule" is {chut}. {che'taHghach} is a noun representing the
ongoing rule of a leader, as in "The rule of Queen Victoria was a time of
colonial expansion and conquest." Never use {-ghach} to blindly create a
missing noun. Use it to create a noun representing a process, a thing, a
happening described by a verb.
We haven't to my knowledge seen {tlhob} take as an object the thing
requested. It might not be right. Some people will react more strongly to
your usage than I just did.
} 'ej quvlIj meq nuq vItlhob
} and I ask what is the meaning of your honor?
{nuq} is placed in a sentence where the noun that forms the answer will go.
For "what is the meaning of X" I recommend {nuq 'oS X}. Same caveat on {tlhob}.
}vagh
} voDleHlI'vaD vItovbe'
} I do not kneel for your emperor
Classic sign that you wrote these out on paper before typing them in: {tor}
not {tov}. Print neatly. :)
I suspect that this is a statement of defiance, that the speaker is refusing
or stating that if asked s/he would refuse to kneel for the emperor.
{vItorQo'} expresses this. {vItorbe'} is the simple statement of fact that
you at some point in past present or future did not kneel for the emperor.
} 'ej "Qo'" chojatlh jagh jubbe' SoH
}and if you say "Don't", you will be my
}mortal enemy.
You missed out the "if" in your Klingon. {"Qo'" chojatlhchugh} "if you say
"don't," to me" (or "if you say 'I refuse' to me" -- be aware of the double
meaning).
You might say {jagh jubbe' Damoj} if you mean that the act of saying "Qo'}
will make the person into your mortal enemy. If you mean that having said
"Qo'" demonstrates that the person is/has been your mortal enemy all along,
then leave what you have.
} toDwI' QeH 'Iw pujDaq nItlhwIj vIlan
} I place my finger in the weak blood of your false saviour
This must be a look up error. {QeH} is angry. You've also omitted "your"
in the Klingon. {toDwI'lI' ngeb} "your false saviour".
}'ej QuchDaj HabDaq vIgItlh.
{ghItlh}
}voDleH ngeb 'ej toy'wI''a'pu' che'wI' 'e' vIghItlh.
}I write, "Evil emperor and Ruler of the
}slaves!"
Another lookup error. {mIgh} is evil.
Use {je} after all nouns to link nouns. {'ej} links verbs.
Use {'e'} only if it is representing a sentence.
<voDleH mIgh, toy'wI''a'pu' che'wI' je> vIghItlh
alternately:
mIgh voDleH 'ej toy'wI''a'pu' che' 'e' vIghItlh
"I inscribe that the emperor is weak and rules slaves."
Possibly you could write the above without the {'e'}, using {ghItlh} as a
verb of saying.
}This is a work in progress, and I have tried to use some new grammer
}from HolQeDs that I have been reading.
Remember: unless Okrand says it it isn't really new grammar, just people
twisting and speculating on what we've got.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian