tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 16 22:55:12 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Talk like a Klingon!
- From: d'Armond Speers <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Talk like a Klingon!
- Date: Sun, 17 Jul 1994 10:51:35 -0400 (EDT)
> I a recent conversation with HoD Qanqor (He was at the KLI Kling-Phling and
> I was not),he asked me "qatlh naDev SoHbe'?"
>
> I must point out that as far as I can tell this phrase is
> completely gramatical but it struck me as an English Idiom because
> it makes use of the verb "to be".
Except, TKD tells us that this is precisely the manner in which we are
to use the "to be" construction. "To be at a place."
> 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'?"
We know that we can use verbal suffixes with pronouns, but is there
evidence that we can do so when the pronoun is NOT used in a "to be"
construction? By removing the component of the sentence you objected
to, you invalidated your rephrasal. Also, we are told that we can use
verbal suffixes, but there's no evidence (to my knowledge) that we can
use prefixes with pronouns.
> OR
> "qatlh bIDach?"
Much more honorable.
--Holtej