tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 07 01:18:45 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Do, ray', mI'(was:Bad to
- From: [email protected] (Jennifer James)
- Subject: Do, ray', mI'(was:Bad to
- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 94 14:00:00 -0640
- Organization: TRAVEL ONLINE / ST. LOUIS ONLINE - (314) 561-4956
* Quoting Klingon Language List to Jennifer James
* On Stardate 06-29-94 15:21
jatlhpu' ~mark:
>tlhaQbejqu' mughlIj. mu'reH Dachoqbej. majQa'! parHa'.
KLL> ^^^^^^
KLL> This threw me a second. We don't really have any evidence that you
KLL> can make compounds like this, with a noun and a verb. We know you can
KLL> compound nouns with nouns, but that's it. Besides, it's pretty
KLL> obviously a loan-translation. Hmm, can we do better? I suppose we
KLL> could use "Quj" instead of "reH", wince we know that's a noun, but it's
KLL> still a cheap translation. Any better ideas?
Many verbs seem to double as nouns when the intended meaning is not
"that which" ("Quj", "qaD", "ghong", "'oy'", etc.), so I had assumed
that this was a general rule. Incorrect assumption? ... Whoops,
just re-read TKD p.176.
I agree about the cheap translation, though. Can you use
nominalizations in compound nouns? If so, what about "mu'So'wI'"?
I think word_guile would be perfect except I can't find a word for
"guile".
KLL> ~mark
Jennifer James
... Internet: [email protected]
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12