tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 04 23:28:28 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
SoS Goose KLBC
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: SoS Goose KLBC
- Date: Mon, 04 May 1998 23:25:30 -0700
Tim Hagg ([email protected]) wrote:
> vengDaq tlhong targhHomvam
"This piglet bargained in the city."
> I realize that, "going to market" has some ambiguity to it in
English(selling or being sold);
> I chose to ignore that.
It's grammatically correct. I respect your choice to ignore the ambiguity,
but I think something else you ignored is important: the motion, or at least
the change of state. Off the top of my head, {tlhongmeH veng ghoS
targhHomvam}. As I implied with "change of state" a verb in {-choH} might work.
> juHDaq ratlh targhHomvam
> I decided to forgo "targhoyHomvam"; it seemed too much.
It would also place two type 1 noun suffixes on the same noun. So it would
indeed be too much.
> qeyvaq lIngta' Sop targhHomvam
>> qeyvaq lIngta' Sop targhHomvam (This little piggy had roast beef.)
>> "qeyvaq lIngta'" seemed the closest to roast beef; not too
>> extravagant, not too common.
You've got me on qeyvaq. I know {lIngta'} is an animal, so I'll assume
{qeyvaq} is a noun or a personal name after which a method of preparation is
named, and that you gor this from somewhere in KGT beyond the point where I
tired of indexing. I know I'll be flamed if I'm wrong.
> pagh Sop targhHomvam (This little piggy had none.)
> Am I using "pagh" correctly?
HIja'. As far as we know.
> juHDaq ghoSta'vIS <wee> <wee> SaQ targhHomvam
>> (This little piggy cried, "wee wee", all the way home.)
{ghoS} takes its destination as the direct object, so omit the locative
suffix altogether. The continuous suffix {-taH}, NOT the perfective suffix
{-ta'} is required with {-vIS}. Another {-taH} on {SaQ} would help convey
the idea of "all the way" {juH ghoStaHvIS <wee> <wee> SaQtaH targhHomvam}.
> OK, TKD is not too clear on relative clauses; "While going home.",
> would not be sentence in English, but it would be in Klingon?
It's not a sentence in Klingon, either. A Klingon principal clause
contains exactly one verb that is neither acting adjectivally nor
carrying a type 9 suffix other than {-'a'} or {-jaj}. All the type 9
suffixes except {-'a'}, {-ghach}, {-jaj} and {-wI'} create subordinate
clauses. A sentence can contain more than one principal clause if they are
linked by verb
conjunctions. A terminology note (I knew what you meant) a clause in
{-taHvIS} is 'subordinate' not 'relative.'
> It seems to me that awhile ago there was talk of Klingon
> onomatopoeia on the list; so there might be a Klingon "<wee> <wee>"
> equivalent but I couldn't find it.
We haven't any I can think of know of. For the sake of stories we
might make it up, the way we would make up new omomatopoeia in any
language: simulating the sound best we can without straying too far
outside the borders of spelling norms. But the fact that it has
appeared in one of our stories carries no weight. It's speculation.
I hope there aren't too many errors in this. I'm tired. (I sound like I'm
posting a KLBC, not answering one). :)
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian