tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 21 11:01:16 1993
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Puncation revisited / Hos tlhIngan
- From: "Matthew Whiteacre" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Puncation revisited / Hos tlhIngan
- Date: Thu, 21 Oct 93 12:41:32 CDT
->-> vI'IjtaHvIS pa'Daq puqBe'pu' parHa'Be' be'nal'oy
->-"While I continue to listen over at that place, the dear wife does not like
->-the girls." (Note the double negative on parHa'Be'. I would have just said
->-"puqBe'pu' par be'nal'oy." Otherwise you are really saying something like,
->-"The dear wife does not undo disliking the girls.")
-ghobe', "does not undo disliking" 'oHbe', 'ach "redundant" 'oHbej.
No, It is not "does not undo disliking", but it is certainly redundant.
-"par" QaQ law' "parHa'be'" QaQ puS 'e' vIQochbe'chu', 'ach lughtaH
"par" is better than "parHa'be'", but "parHa'be'" is still correct.
-"parHa'be'". 'ej: "in the room" mughbej "pa'Daq"'e'. not -Daq lo'lu'
and: "pa'Daq" is certainly "in the room". Never use "-Daq" when you intend
to mean over there.
-"there" HechDI' "pa'". 'ej: "While I continue to listen in the room"
and: It is not able "While I continue to listen in the room".
-'oHlaHbe'. "locative" 'oHba' "pa'Daq"'e', vaj *tlha'*bogh wotvaD ghom.
"pa'Daq" is obviously locative, thus intended for the verb's group which follows.
->Why is the translation not:
->"While I continue to listen, my dear wife does not like the girls
->in the room"
-Doch DaHechbogh 'oH "my dear wife does not like the girls *to be* in the room"'
"my dear wife does not like the girls *to be* in the room" or "... does not
like that the girls are in the room" is which thing you intend to mean.
-"... does not like that the girls are in the room"'e' joq. "when she is in
"when she is in the room, she doesn't like the girls" is certainly not what
you mean (I trust).
-the room, she doesn't like the girls" DaHechbe'bej ('e' vIvoq). vaj
Thus I recommend:
-vI'IjtaHvIS pa'Daq chaH puqbe'pu''e' 'e' par be'nal'oy
->The correct text in tlhIngan should be??:
->ramjepDaq jIvum 'ej nISghach vIpoQ
->wa'leS ghojwI'wI' Ser vIja'nISbej <correction
-ghobe'. lughqu'pu' lughmoHwI'. mu'tlhegh 'oHbe' Dochvam'e'. "their good work
No. The person who caused you to be correct [corrector?] was certainly
correct. This thing is not a sentence. It translates to "Thier good work".
-mugh. "Their work is good" DaneH Daja'pu', vaj 'oHnIS:
You reported "Thier work is good" [I left DaneH out because I can't
translate it], thus it needs to be:
->wa'maH loS Hu' "Power Klingon" vIje' <correction
->vIparHa' 'ach Qoypo'mey qab 'e' vItu'
-Do'Ha', mu'tlheghvamvaD lughmoHghach vIlanHa'pu', 'ach lughbe'ba'
Unlucky, I did not place the corrector for this sentence, but this
sentence is obviously not correct.
-mu'tlheghvam. mugh: "I like it, but I find that bad hearing-experts."
I translate it: "I like it, but I find that bad hearing-experts."
->ja'chuqghach vI'Ij 'ach vIghItlhlaHbe' <spelling correction
->lIHghachvaD chargwI' qatlho'
->jInIDqanglI' 'ach Qatlh
->vI'IjtaHvIS pa'Daq puqbe'pu' par be'nal'oy <correction
I have a few questions regarding things.
What concept is "lughmoHghach" or "luchmoHwI'" intended to convey? Are
they teh same, or is there a subtle difference?
How should I say "I like it, but I have found how poor my hearing skill is"?
| | Matt Whiteacre
| | MMW8970@ZEUS.TAMU.EDU
- From: email@example.com.OZ.AU (The Saint)