tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Sep 05 16:11:54 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KL BC - jImugh 'e' jInIDlI' 'a Qatlh
- From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KL BC - jImugh 'e' jInIDlI' 'a Qatlh
- Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 16:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
---Alan Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ja'pu' Qov:
> >Hee hee. qaStaHvIS wa' DIS, mu'meyvetlh DungDaq pongwIj'e' neH
> >vIleghtaH. pa' latlh pong vIleghDI' jIyev.
>
> mugh tuv'el:
> >TRANS: During the year, I saw those words above on my name only.
> >I paused as soon as I saw the additional name there.
>
> ja'qa' Qov:
> >Not quite what I said, actually. Check the location of the locative
> >and recall how noun-noun's work. "in (those words' area above)"
> >"For one year I saw only MY name above those words."
>
> For whatever reason, this {latlh pong} implies "someone else's name"
> to me a lot more strongly than it does "the additional name". It's
> moderately ambiguous, but the triple whammy of context, my experience
> with Qov's phrasing, and my own practice of avoiding {latlh X} where
> {latlh} alone would work tells me that I should at least mention it.
I also prefer the translation "another's name" or "another name."
"The additional name" doesn't make a lot of sense in context as there
as only one name.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com