tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 22 14:38:43 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: wot tiqqu'qu'

On Nov 22,  4:54pm, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> >shouldn't that be:
> 
> >   bIlobHa'Qo'chuqqa'moHlaHbe'qu'law'taHneS'a'?
> 
> Probably not, since verbs with "-chuq" in them have to have plural
> subjects.  I haven't really tried to make sense of the rest of the thing,
> but it would sem that it'd have to be:
> 
> SulobHa'Qo'chuqqa'moHlaHbe'qu'law'taHneS'a'?
> 
> 
> >--   chargwI'
> 
> ~mark

     Thanks. I appreciate the correction. Such nudges do remind me what to
keep in mind later. I think the word would be easier to understand, though
less impressive as SulobchuqlaH'a'? I'm not sure if the -chuq helps or
hinders the meaning. I think it helps, but it feels weird. Most of the rest
of it definitely adds to the obscurity. It's sort of like spice in soup. The
right amount of the right ones makes a wonderful meal. Emptying the spice
rack into a soup is not usually all that tasty...

     Also, I very much appreciated the help with "Four score and seven years
ago..." Translating it forced me to think deeper and gain a greater
appreciation for the original text. I'll try to find other texts that I may
enjoy as much through the process.

--   chargwI'

Back to archive top level