tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 11 08:37:54 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: A poem
>Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 09:39:54 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: "Mark J. Reed" <[email protected]>
>ghItlh charghwI':
>\ Fine. I like this better. It might be simpler and more accurate
>\ to the English to say, {taghpu' may'}.
>Not to bring up the old discussion about transitivity or lack thereof in
>Hol, but from the description of "tagh" in the mu'ghom, I gather that it
>takes an object ("to begin, initiate (a process)"), and I'm uncomfortable with
>leaving it objectless. How about "may' taghlu'pu'"? Almost "The battle
>was joined" . . .
Ah, but this one we can answer. While "tagh" does appear to be transitive
in the definition, we have canonical evidence that it can be used
intransitively. In Power Klingon we have the phrase "taghbej mu'qaD veS"
for "curse warfare has definitely begin" (should probably have had a -pu'
on that). If the KD definition is also right, this is at least one example
of a Klingon word that flip-flops transitivity like an English one.
>-marqoS
~mark