tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 22 14:50:27 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Headless relatives and {SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh}

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

Voragh:
> >If you don't like this use of {'ej}, another way we've seen is to link the
> >two {-bogh}ed verbs with {je} as if they were nouns, as in this example
> >from the Anthem:
> >    yoHbogh matlhbogh je SuvwI' Say'moHchu' may' 'Iw
> >    The blood of battle washes clean the warrior brave and true.
> >which even more people have found bizarre.

QeS lagh:
>SuStel, Dar'Qang and I rehashed this one about a month ago. :) I think that
>all three of us ended up pretty much agreeing that {yoHbogh matlhbogh je
>SuvwI'} was a way of shoving this idea into a decent-sounding poetic meter.
>As you said, we all found it a bit weird.

I didn't follow that thread, so forgive me if I repeat a suggestion...

A common Okrandian solution to problems like would be to consider it {no' 
Hol} and, therefore, evidence of an older stage of the language, not 
particularly relevant to 23rd/24th century {ta' Hol}.

Re-reading the Anthem, you'll notice that there's nothing in it even 
remotely implying "modern" space travel.  In fact, with the reference to 
joining "our fathers in the Black Fleet", this particular {van bom} could 
be ancient indeed.



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level