tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 30 19:55:34 2008
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon WOTD: ngIp (verb)
On Apr 30, 2008, at 2:09 PM, Sangqar wrote:
> While I have been trying to use mostly Klingon, I will switch to
> English
> for a bit to avoid confusion.
maj. mIS taHmoH mIS.
> ...But you had trouble understanding even my well-formed sentences,
Seng rap vISIQ. pablaw' mu'tlhegh, 'ach Huj mu'mey DawIvbogh.
I had the same trouble. While the grammar seemed okay, your choice
of vocabulary was...unobvious.
> and judging by your retranslations, I assumed that the reason for that
> was that you were unaware of the other meanings and other usages of
> the
> words in question.
rap "precise" <pup> je 'e' DaHarmo' Dayajbe'lu' 'e' vIQub.
I think it's your belief that {pup} means "precise" that kept you
from being understood readily.
> Is that assumption what insulted you?
Dapummo' DatIch.
I was struck more by the accusation of ignorance more than any
unstated assumption.
> Perhaps the way I phrased it in Klingon was what insulted you. If that
> is the case, I welcome suggestions for how to rephrase it.
How about:
mupbogh qam vIDelbe'. qech pIm vIHech. chaq <qar> vIlo'choHchugh
Dayaj.
>> jIpupbe' 'e' vISov, vaj qayajHa'pu'.
>
> I misunderstood you because you knew you were imprecise?
>
> I'm not quite sure what you mean by that.
bImIS bImughHa'mo'. yImughqa'. 'ej mu'tay' yIghongqa'Qo'.
That's because you didn't read it correctly. Try again. And this
time don't project non-TKD meanings onto his words.
> ...If "borrow" is the wrong word because
> one doesn't give it back, then "steal" is the wrong word because one
> doesn't take it away.
I think you're confusing the informal term "steal" with the legal
term "larceny". One can certainly steal intangibles. When
discussing artistic expression, for example, the legal term is
"plagiarize".
>> qaq mIw pIm.
>>
>> mu'mey nov lo'laH tlhIngan Hol?
>
> "A different method (process) is preferable. Can Klingon use new
> words?"
>
> If I understand you correctly,...
Dayajbe'. yImughqa'. tlhobtaH Doq 'e' 'oSbe' mu'tlhegh cha'DIch 'e'
yISov. qaqbogh mIw pIm chuptaH.
You do not. Try again. And this time recognize that the second line
is a suggested different method for expressing the idea of "borrowing
words", not an actual question on his part.
>> jar maHar.
>
> "A month we believe."
>
> My best guess here is that you meant {jaS maHar}, in which case I
> would
> respond that I have no problem with you disagreeing with me.
toH, Doq QIn vIlaDDI' <jaS> vIlegh. QaghDaj vItu'pu'be'.
I read {jaS maHar} in the original note and had to go check the
original post to make sure you hadn't miscopied it.
> (But I do have to wonder who the "we" is.)
jIja'choHpa', cha' qab neH lutu'lu'. <maH> cher <SoH> <jIH> je.
chay' 'e' DaSovbejbe'?
Until I entered the discussion, there were only two people involved.
How can you fail to put "you" and "me" together to make "we"?
> I was trying to point out that I was not mistakenly using {-ghach}
> on a
> naked verb - I was doing it intentionally.
'ej Dayajlu'taHvIS, jumghachHom ghaj ta'lIj 'e' 'angbej ghaH.
And he was successfully pointing out that the result, while
understandable, was not without a modicum of odditude.
-- ghunchu'wI'