tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 08 18:31:06 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC - DaH mughqa' tuv'el 'e' nIDlaw'
lab tuv'el
>
> KLBC - DaH mughqa' tuv'el 'e' nIDlaw'
>
> jabbI'IDwIj vebHa' vIqontaHvIS DoHa' jIQonglaw'! wejpuH.
> mu'tleghmey Qatlh vIyajlaHbe'law'.
Do'Ha'bej. And don't forget the <'> in <Do'Ha'>.
> nuq vIjatlh vIneH 'e' vIbuS 'ach
I see what you're going for, but Klingon doesn't work like this. Since
English uses words like "what" and "who" as both relative pronouns and
question words, we sometimes try to do the same in Klingon, but it just
doesn't work. One way to rephrase is "I concentrate on my words" or "... my
message" or something similar.
> wa' mu'tlheghDaq cha' wotmey lutu'lu'chugh jImiSqu'moH.
DaH mu'tlhegh nap DayajlaHlaw'. laHlIj DaDubtaHchugh vaj tugh mu'tlheghmey
Qatlh DayajchoH je. And you have two typos in the last word: <jImISqu'choH>.
> HevwI' wot nobwI' je ngaSlaHba' mu' ghom.
> latlh ghom choHchugh wa' ghom chay' vItoblaH?
> wa' mu' ghom nobwI' 'oH'a' DIp pagh latlh ghom HevwI' 'oH'a' DIp?
> [If one phrase modifies another, how can I tell if a noun is the
> subject of one phrase, or the object of the other?]
> qagh Qop rur yabwIj...
It's probably better to ask grammatical questions like this in English -
without the translation, I would not have figured out what you meant.
I don't know specifically what kind of phrases you are asking about, so I
can't really answer your question here. Reread TKD section 6.2 on complex
sentences for a good explanation of this sort of thing.
Context is a wonderful thing. If you try to speak in clear, concise
sentences, it will usually be obvious to any semi-skilled speaker what is
modifying what. Of course, if you try to come up with long, convoluted - but
still legal - sentences, you are sure to confuse everyone.
> Can a noun-noun construction include another noun-noun construction,
> i.e. noun-noun-noun? Or a noun-verb as adjective, i.e. puq Doy'
> QongDaq "the tired child's bed?"
Yes. <matlh be'nI' puqbe'> would be Maltz's sister's daughter, or Maltz's
niece.
> Can the rovers be' and qu' be used more than once in a verb
> construction?
Yes. It would be somewhat unusual, but here are some examples:
<vISopqangbe'moHbe'> "I did not make him unwilling to eat". <jIvumqu'taHqu'>
"I am (very) continuously working very hard."
> Can more than one adverbial modify the same sentence?
Yes. I don't have a canon example handy, but <DaH chaq jImej> would
certainly be legal.
> Can more than one adjective modify the same noun?
No. Marc Okrand has recently said that a noun can have only one verb acting
adjectivally, but you can always use a <-bogh> clause. So <moQ Doq tIn
vIlegh> is illegal, but <tInbogh moQ Doq vIlegh> is fine.
> jIHDaq tuQDoq lo'lu'.
<-Daq> can't really be used that way. What you said is something like
"Someone used a mind sifter while standing on me" or "Someone used a mind
sifter inside my body", etc. What you want is the suffix <-vaD>. <jIHvaD
tuQDoq lo'lu'>
> Here's what I meant:
>
> mu' ghom - phrase (group of words)
> HevwI' - object [noun] (recipient)
> nobwI' - subject [noun] (giver)
I managed to guess what these words meant in your sentences, but it was not
obvious. It is probably best to stick to English for this sort of grammar
discussion, at least for a while.
pagh
Temporary Beginners' Grammarian