tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 11 04:55:09 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: paghmo'
jatlh Robert Baruch:
:
:
:
: On Fri, 11 Feb 1994, Matthew Whiteacre wrote:
:
: I haven't read the Shakespearean work here, so I won't be able to
: fill in the blanks (if there are any) left in the Klingon....
:
[...]
: >
: > >DataHghach nulay'bogh Qupmo', juSta'
: > What is this?
:
: Hmm...
: {DataHghach} = Behavior as (Da -taH -ghach, not Da- taH -ghach)
: {nulay'bogh} = he/they who promises us
: {Qupmo'} = because he/they is young
: {juSta'} =he/they have overtaken them
:
: Perhaps "Because he who promises us behavior is young, he has
: overtaken them".
:
: Makes sense except for the behavior part, but maybe I'm missing
: some context.
I don't think this is possible -- notice that >DataHghach nulay'bogh< is in the
_object_ position of >Qupmo'<, not the subject. This one >miS<tifies me! ;>
:
: >
: > >pIHwI' juSpu'ghach juSpu' ghaH law'; qaja'laHghach chopIHlaH puS
: > [[Noun] (verb of quality)]law' [[Noun] (verb of quality)] puS
:
: {pIHwI'} = one who expects/is suspicious
: {juSpu'ghach} = his overtaking of him
: {juSpu' ghaH} = *he* has overtaken him
: {qaja'laHghach} = my reporting to you
: {chopIHlaH} = you can expect me
:
: I'm totally mystified by this.
Hmm..."His overtaking of the one who expects [should this be >piHlu'wi'<?] is
more than I am able to tell you"?
:
: >
: > >Q: pongvam pagh ghajwI' vISov, jaw <-- jaw for lady?? jawbe'
: > ghotvam ngaSbe'bej mangghom
:
: <this name> <zero/none> <owner> <I know it>, <lord/chat (in-joke!)>
: <this person> <it certainly does not contain it> <army>
:
: "I know this name's no owner, the army certainly doesn't contain
: the lord's this person."
:
: Oh, there just has to be something about Klingon grammar I don't know.
I don't think so. Step back for a second, and you get:
"Of this name 0 owners I know, lord." --or-- "I don't know the name or its
owner, lord."
"The army certainly does not contain this person."
With either alternative for >pagh<, this gives
"I know no one of that name. This person is certainly not in the army."
If >pagh< is being used as a number, >pagh pongvam ghajwi'< would be clearer.
:
:
: >
: > >L: Dayu', 'Iv DaqeltaHvIS, be'nI'puq?
: > ???
:
: <You interrogate them>, <who> <while you consider them>, <sister-child>
:
: "You interrogate them, while you consider whom, sister-child?"
:
: > nuq ta'bogh bItlhobmoH, be'nI'puqbe'?
: >
:
: <what> <who accomplishes> <you cause to ask>, <sister-child-woman>?
:
: Hmm... Another grammar rule I'm unaware of.
?????????
qaQaHpu' 'e' vitulbej!
:
: --Rob
:
:
:
:
Qapla' Qichqemwi'vo'.
--
===============================================================================
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ | Marnen E.
| |/ \ \ / \ \ / \ \ | |/ \_\ | |/ \ \ / \_\ | |/ \ \ | Laibow-Koser
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |/ | | | | | laibow@brick.
|_| |_| |_| \_\|_| |_| |_| |_| \_\_/ |_| |_| | purchase.edu
| SUNY Purchase
===============================================================================