tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 23 09:17:38 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qIp/ngeQ (was "Titanic" chov SuSvaj)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: qIp/ngeQ (was "Titanic" chov SuSvaj)
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 12:17:25 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "TPO" at Jan 22, 98 06:44:51 pm
According to TPO:
>
> >No. I hit (qIp) the wall with my hand. My hand hit (ngeQ) the
> >wall... I fire a pistol
> >and hit (qIp) the target. The bullet hits (ngeQ) the target.
...
> >charghwI'
>
> When did ngeQ take on this meaning?
> My books tell me:
>
> qIp - hit (with something) (like you said above)
qIp - hit (with hand, fist, implement) (v) [TKD]
ngeQ - bump into, run into, collide with (v) [KGT]
When I hit a wall with my hand, jIqIp. ngeQ ghopwIj. I don't
see this as taking on new meaning. In English, we say "I hit the
wall with my hand," and we also say, "My hand hit the wall." In
Klingon, the first sentence would obviously use {qIp} as the
verb, because I hit (with hand, fist, implement) the wall. In
the second sentence, we'd use {ngeQ} because my hand bumped
into, ran into, collided with the wall.
Similarly, when I shot a pistol, I hit the target. The
gun/bullet system was the implement, so I'd use the verb {qIp}
and the subject would be me, not the pistol or the bullet. I
could, in English, also say the bullet hit the target.
Meanwhile, what I'm really saying is that the bullet bumped
into, ran into, collided with the target, so I'd use {ngeQ}.
So, what exactly is your problem with this?
> ngeQ - bump into, run into, collide with (sure, this is close to hit)
Well, while all meanings for "hit" do not match {ngeQ}, all
meanings for {ngeQ} do match "hit", unless you can come up with
something I haven't thought of yet.
> but don't forget:
>
> mup - impact, strike (the bullet hits (mup) the target)
Synonyms exist. Get used to it.
> DloraH
> www2.rpa.net/~cheesbro
> (last updated: 31 Dec 97)
>
>
charghwI'