tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 10 12:44:33 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wejmaH vagh: <potlh QonoS>
At 08:28 10/02/2012, you wrote:
> Se'vIrmey cha' vajar. ghe'naQ bomwI'vam ngaghtaH yuQ qumwI'[105].
> yo' 'aj SuchtaH Sutmey tuQbe'bogh nga'chuqqangqu'law'wI'vam'e'[113].
If {-taH} here is intended to describe a continual or habitual action
rather than a continuous one, I think it's better left off.
If SuStel is reading I'd be interested in his take on this, wrt to
his "every verb needs an aspect suffix" idea.
> na'SIqya'ngan nach Hom much la'. pIHbej boqwI' nach.
naDev <nub> qaq law' <pIH> qaq puS 'e' vIchup.
'ay'vam vIngeHta' Qaghvetlh DaSamDI' 'ach 'ay'mey chu'vaD vIHeSqa'be'
'e' vInID.
> Do' ghuHmoHmo' Hota'ro'
> ghu'vam qelta' vajar vaj bItbe'chu'. QonoSDaq HoHvetlh qonta' 'ej
'ungya pa'
> tlhoy'Daq HoHvetlh mIllogh nuDlu'chugh 'oHDaq HovpoH leghlu'.
De' qar qonta'mo' Hub'eghlaHba' vajar.
potlhqu' QonoS.
> "puqpu' vIghajbe'," jatlh vajar. "yatlhtaHvIS HoH jagh. boghpu'chuq puq DaH
> wa'maH ben boghpu'."
boghpu'chugh
Those errors always weird me. I also frequently typo gh/H and ch/j
and j/q when it follows an I. It's obviously not a typo in the
"finger hits wrong key" sense, seeing as I'm not using a pIqaD
keyboard. They don't happen on words that I don't know well--well tey
might, but that's a different story. No one doubts that I know the
difference between -chugh and -chuq and won't confuse them, and
clearly -chuq there follows a V7, so I'm not thinking -chuq. Do I
whisper the sounds in my head and have them sound the same that way?
I know I have chunked the "letters" in my head even if they are more
than one keystroke, because if I type ghaH and then decide to change
it to chaH, I always delete the gh and make it ch. How does my brain work?
> ratlh pagh. ngeb Hoch vajar HeSmeyqoq. Qamqu' vajar.
ghaytan moghqu' qImyal.
'ej moghqu'DI' qImyal ...
> "reH Suvrup SuvwI''a'," jatlh Sa'. QuchHa'law'.[109]
wejlogh QuchHa'.
Datogh 'e vIchupbe'.
> wa'logh ghup vajar. quvDaj qaDqu'ta' Sa' 'ach Sa' ghaH 'ej SIbI' tlhIjta'.
> qeH moch neHbe'. qa'meH vIttlhegh lajmeH ghu' buSHa' vajar. jatlh
"latlh De'
> vIqawchugh qaja'." pa'vo' yItta' Sa'. rInlaw' qepvam. tlhoS
cha'maH wa' rep.
vaj tach ghoSnIS qar'a'?
Huh. I wrote my comments immedately as they occurred to me during my
first read-through. I went through and fixed some formatting as I read
it a second time. It wasn't until a final nit-pick scan for
punctuation that I noticed that {tlhoS cha'maH wa' rep} has an
adverbial but entirely lacks a verb.
And now I am wondering what the verb should be. Oh, I know.
{tugh cha'maH wa'logh Qoy'lu'pu'.}
> 'avwI'vaD jatlh vajar, "tachDaq HIDor."
>
> "mIw DaSIQ 'e' DaSap, qaH," jatlh 'avwI'.
Dang, without a {-ta'} on {DaSap} this feels like it isn't quite
complete. It's an annoying rule, but I proudly stand by the fake
linguistic traditions of Klingons from decades ago.
For a moment I thought you were talking about fake history, but whoa,
they asked me today in class when I started learning Klingon, and it
was the *eighties*. That was decades ago. Back then I handwrote my
essays and paid someone to type them on a typewriter.
/
/
--------
--------
--------
---------- Qov :-)
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol