tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 11 13:13:10 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Re: mach 'ach Hach
ja' Qov:
> At 15:33 98-05-08 -0700, HovqIj wrote:
>
> }va. <KLBC> vIlIjqa' jay'. HIHoHQo'.
> va. KLBC Danopmo' vIjangnISbe'pu' 'e' vIHar. DaH qaHoH. :)
DaHjaj paSqu'. wa'leS jIvumqu'nIS. cha'leS maHay'laH. qapIH. ;)
[...HIvqa' pe'wI'...]
>
> }> <I hate and I love. You maybe ask why. (I'm not sure if I remember this
> }> correctly, {ghel} means ask, right?)
> }> I don't know [it]. But I notice that it is happening and I suffer a
> }> lot.>
>
> }> <jImuS 'ej jImuSHa'. <qatlh?> chaq bIghel.
> }> vISovbe'. 'ach qaStaH 'e' vItu' 'ej jIbechqu'.>
>
> I would have written chaq bIghel <qatlh>, because the way to write speech
> (lets assume ghel is a verb of saying, it might not be) is to put the
> attributed or quoted speech immediately before ot immediately after the verb
> of saying. We don't know anything about intervening adverbs.
As SuStel has already pointed out, the rules state that the _sentences_ are put
together. Thus I put the <qatlh> first because this was the order of the original
text.
>
>
> }> The original text was:
> }> <Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
> }> Nescio, sed fieri sentio et excrucior.>
>
> I don't read Latin, so beyond recognizing cognates this doesn't help me too
> much. :(
*Latin* Hol vIparHa'. Do'Ha' lumuS nuvpu' law' pagh luyajlaHbe'.
>
>
> I should also mention that {muSHa'} isn't everyone's 100 percent favourite
> for translating "love." I think it works well because of the way love and
> hate are so slitherily interchangeable, but the lack of canon using it that
> way and the possibility that {muSHa'} means mishate has to be mentioned.
>
> Qov [email protected]
> Now on ICQ: 12235599
HovqIj