tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 13 22:33:56 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "to be"
- From: [email protected] (David Barron)
- Subject: Re: "to be"
- Date: Thu, 14 Jul 1994 08:30:10 -0600 (MDT)
> > I would like to propose two alternatives to "qatlh naDev
> > SoHbe'"
>> that lack any "to be" construction (something I feel one
> should
> avoid in order to sound "Klingon"). My suggestions are
> "qatlh bISaHbe'?"
> OR
> "qatlh bIDach?"
>After the example of "naDev bIHtaH" in PK, we now know that
>something like this is perfectly acceptable, and we should no
>longer hesitate in using it. Sure, your examples work, but I
>don't think Krankor was wrong.
>Amy
I agree HoD Qanqor is NOT wrong. I simply feel that avoiding the use
of "to be" will give the speaker a more Klingon sound.
--
David Barron || [email protected] || lup Hoch yIyInqu'
Klingon Language Postal Course || qaStaHvIS wa' lup
P.O. Box 37, Eagle ID 83616 || wa'netlh yInpu' yInmey
IT'S FREE!!! Send S.A.S.E ||