tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 06 01:50:07 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: qajatlh

On Apr 5, 10:39pm, "trI'Qal" wrote:
...
> >tlhIngan Hol vIghojtaH vIHem.
> >
> >wo' Degh boghaj'a'?
> >naDev Degh DalI''a'?
> 
> nom Daghojlaw'lI'mo', bIquvqu'!
> majQa'!
> 
> One error!  Very nice, qor!
> You actually have a subordinate clause in the first sentence, which you
> forgot to mark with a type 9 suffix.  You can't have two verbs just
> following one another as you have originally, unless the second one (the
> one on the right) is <neH>, <jatlh> or <ja'>. (Please refer to the section
> on sentences as objects on pages 65-67 to see why these are the only verbs
> which can be used this way).  The addition of the suffix -mo' ("because") 
> to your first verb clears this problem up:
>         tlhIngan Hol vIghojtaHmo', vIHem.
>         "Because I am continuing to learn Klingon, I am proud"
> --HoD trI'Qal

     Good. I'd like to add another possible version of this:

            tlhIngan Hol vIghojtaH 'e' vIHem
          "I am proud that I am learning Klingon language."

     When I saw the original, I thought this was what the original intent of
the message, but the speaker just dropped the {'e'} pronoun. Noting the
exceptional cases {neH, jatlh, ja'} without mentioning the sentence-as-object
construction may prove to be confusing, since it doesn't give a new student a
place to look to understand why it would have made any difference to have
used those verbs (TKD 6.2.5).

charghwI'

Back to archive top level