tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 12 06:03:15 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: nuqneH



According to tsai kat clio-international:
> 
>       
>       nuqneH.  rIn jIH.  tlhIngan Hol vIjatlhlaHbe', 'ach tlhIngan Hol
>       vIghoj vIneH.  

bInep. tlhIngan Hol Dajatlhchu'. wej chaq ghu'vam DaghovchoH
'ach qar.

>       jabbI'IDvam 'oH jabbI'IDwij wa'DIch 'e'.  QaghwIj
>       tuQaghHa'chugh, jIQuchqu'.

One little detail. You are a little confused about the
difference between the pronoun {'e'} and the suffix {-'e'}.
Here, you wanted to attach the suffix to the end of {wa'DIch}.
The {'e'} should not be a separate word. Also, {lughmoH} might
be a better verb here than {QaghHa'}, thought that is more a
matter of style. Your meaning is clear.

>       wej HolQeD 3:4 vIHev.  HolQeD 3:4 'e' *California*Daq ngeHlu'bejta''a'.

This last sentence is a wee bit odd. The locative
{*California*Daq} should be first. The object {HolQeD 3:4}
should be second. You don't need {'e'} here at all. The rest is
correct.

>       HIja'.

Since this also means "Yes", you might make yourself clearer
with something simple like, {DaH HIja'!}, which makes a LOT
more sense as "Tell me" than as "yes". Alternatively, you could
use a verbal suffix to make this clear, like {HIja'choH!}.
Again, all this is a matter of style. {HIja'} alone is not
wrong. It merely has the potential of confusing some readers.

>       Qapla', rIn {{8-) //a Klingon with glasses??//
 
Welcome, glasses and all.

charghwI'
-- 

 \___
 o_/ \
 <\__,\
  ">   | Get a grip.
   `   |


Back to archive top level