tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 06 13:00:35 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -Daq quickie
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: -Daq quickie
- Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 16:00:30 EST
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "David Trimboli" at Dec 6, 94 3:16 pm
According to David Trimboli:
>
> Greetings, all.
>
> (1) A quick question: is -Daq allowed to go on a time reference?
> I don't see any reason it shouldn't, but I'd like the grammarians'
> opinions. For example, can I say "wa'maH vatlh repDaq" instead of
> "qaSDI' wa'maH vatlh rep", and "*Sunday*Daq" instead of "qaSDI' *Sunday*"?
> I have seen the latter of each of these examples used, but I don't
> remember seeing the former.
It is considered idiomatic to languages other than Klingon to
use a locative time reference. Time and space seem to be
unrelated within the Klingon language. That's why you have seen
examples like the latter and not the former.
> (2) With all this talk of new watches, I found something cute...
> "Big Ben in London" could be written (to be confusing) as
> "LondonDaq ben'a'" which to me also sounds something like "many years ago
> in London". Of course, you could easily fix this by saying
> "*London*Daq *Ben* tin" or even "*London*Daq tlhaq tin", but it's
> not as much fun that way! :)
Fun or no, as yet it is an exceptionally good idea to mark all
non-Klingon words rather than try to transliterate. It drives
some people crazy. Krankor, in particular, had a reputation for
erupting whenever anybody did this. It really pissed him off,
almost as much as the time when folks started typing everything
in Klingon -- backwards. 'a'jayaD mavcheq? As you can see, it
looks enough like Klingon to drive a Klingonist nuts until the
code is broken.
> D.A.T.
> tlhIngan wo' batlh HubwI'
>
> QUIT
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |