tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 18 10:59:52 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -pu'
mujang "Anthony Appleyard" <[email protected]>:
> jItlhIj. Qo'. 'ach lI', (copy)mey nablu'taHbogh (print)lu'bogh
>lughmoHlu'chugh
> Sorry. No. Only, it would help if future printings of it were revised.
chay' tlhIngan Hol mu'tlheghmeylIj DalIngtaH? jIHvaD Qapbe' mIwlIj.
mu'ghom Dalo'bogh yIDel -- Hujlaw' mu'taylIj. 'ej qatlh ()mey Dalo'?
I don't know what process you're using to come up with your Klingon
sentences, but it's not yielding ones I can read. I also wonder what
sort of dictionary you use. Your vocabulary seems strange. Why did
you not translate "print" as {ghItlh}, and why did you insist on the
word "copy" instead of being specific with {paq}? And I'm sure you
have a good reason for using parentheses, but I usually expect things
with parentheses around them to be extra explanations that I can ignore
when trying to get the general meaning.
>> The proper explanation is obvious in the audiotapes.
> paq mob je' ghotpu' law', ghogh (tape)mey je'be'.
latlh 'aH je'be'ta' chugh, chay' mu'ghom chu' je'qang?
If they bought only (use {neH}, not {mob}) the dictionary without any
other references, why would they want to buy a revised edition? Again,
why did you not use the word {ta} for "tape", or do something with {qon}?
>> What in the world is "future aspect"?
> I meant the "not yet started" aspect.
It's important to keep the concepts of "tense" and "aspect" separate.
-- ghunchu'wI'