tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 06 20:51:14 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: SuvwI'bom
- From: "Qermaq" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: SuvwI'bom
- Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 23:37:11 -0400
jIghItlh 'ej ghItlh ghunchu'wI':
>><HoDlI' ghaH nuq'e'?> <nuq ghaH HoDlI''e'?>
>>- these are synonymous to me. What is the difference? How
>>is this different than the above English sentences?
>I think the Klingon and English sentences *are* different, because there
>is no verb "to be" in Klingon. To express identity in Klingon, I use the
>word {rap}.
I should have written <'Iv> - thanks for not making a big deal - but it
seems then that your hypothesis is that <HoDlI' ghaH 'Iv'e'?> is 'literally'
translated as "Who is considered part of the set 'your captain'?" while the
other is "Your captain is considered part of the set of 'who'?" Dajqu'. No
identity. For identity we say <rap Qanqor HoDlI' je>. Dajqu'chu'!
So, while in English we might ask "Your captain is who?" or "Who is your
captain?" and be requesting the same thing, in the Klingon if <nuq> or <'Iv>
stands for the subject the response will be the name of the captain, pure
and simple. (<HoDwI' ghaH pIqarD'e'>) But putting the 'question pronoun' in
the object spot is similar to giving the answer and expecting the respondent
to give the question. (At least this is your position.)
<veQDuj 'oH DujlIj'e'> = Your ship is a garbage scow. Some say "As for your
ship, it's a garbage scow."
<DujlIj 'oH veQDuj'e'> = The garbage scow is your ship. "As for the garbage
scow, it's your ship."
Dajqu' 'ach wej jIyajchu'. vIDelchu''a'?
Qermaq