tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 23 03:54:47 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhIj
- From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: tlhIj
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 06:24:13 EST
chargwI' qajatlhneS.
I thank you for your critique. I hope soon to get the hang of complex
sentences. Simple ones are, well, simple. There doesn't seem to be much
challenge in saying {HIq SuD}. Actually, fitting the available vocabulary to my
thoughts _can_ take some effort. For instance, I don't know how to say "ball,"
so I couldn't say "the ball is red." Maybe {moQ reHmeH Doq}?
Sajatlhta' > reH "shareware" vIDIlpu' vIlo'chugh.
Here, I indeed intended to use the perfective. By my definition of shareware,
trying it doesn't quite count as using it. If I try it and don't like it, I
don't consider that I have used it.
I apologize for opening the {pong} can of worms. I did see a problem with
{pong} appearing to need both a subject and two different kinds of objects. I
thought I had a clever solution with the {-lu'} and {-'egh} suffixes. {-lu'}
would seem to remove the need for a subject, and {-'egh} makes the subject the
same as the direct object. The other word I considered was {per}, but it looks
like it might have the same problem as {pong}. I think I will continue to use
{pong}, and maybe the constant irritation will force the issue. :-)
Usage aside, instead of the timid {ghunchu'wI' pong'egh}, I should have said
{ghunchu'wI' HIpong} (as in "Call me Ishmael). That would be more like a
Klingon, would it not?
chojatlhta' > bIQuch'a'?
mu'meylIj muQuchmoH.
qhunchu'wI' HIpong.
--------------------------------------------------
Alan Anderson Delco Electronics
-.-. --.- Service Test Equipment Engineering
.-- -... ----. .-. ..- ..-. System Software Group