tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 24 03:13:19 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Another saying
According to [email protected]:
...
> tlhIngan Hol vIjatlhqu'taHvIS wa' tera'ngan mu' vISovbe' 'e' vItlhojDI'
> vIjatlh:
>
> <whatever Klingon word> vIQummeH nuq vIjatlh?
So, we presume that {Qum} is transitive, do we?
...
> >> If you do not wish a thing heard; do not say it.
> >> Doch Qoylu' DaneHbe'chugh yIjatlhQo'
[deleted stuff about how nice it is to state the implied {vaj}]
> <vaj> lo'lu'DI' loQ qaqlaw' mu'tlhlegh. 'a <vaj> lo'lu'be'chugh vaj
> lughqu'ba'taH.
In Your Humble Opinion.
> [thing] DaQummeH {SoQ}'e' chaq yIlo'.
"speech, lecture, address"? I don't know. Sounds like a bit of
a stretch to me. I still vote for {joS}.
> >charghwI'
>
> I don't really agree with the use of {-lu'} here. The reason why is not
> grammatically-, but culturally-based. My explanation as to why is rather
> rather lengthy, but here goes:
... [deleted lengthy description]
> I myself restrict my usage of {-lu'} to cases where the subject could be a
> broad range of possibilities:
Isn't that exactly what the original text suggested? "If you do
not wish something to be heard..." as in "If you do not want
anybody to hear something..." How is that different from your
acceptable situation for {-lu'}?
> [thing] Qumlu'meH <Doch> lo'lu'
>
> where the subject is indefinite, because it could be you or I or any other
> person who uses {Doch} to mean "thing". I also use it where the subject is
> unimportant/redundant.
Again, what is your point? "If you don't want something
heard..." involves an unimportant subject.
> Guido#1, Leader of All Guidos
>
>
charghwI'