tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 24 17:08:22 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }}} QIp *driver -Reply
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }}} QIp *driver -Reply
- Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 17:08:22 -0400
>From: [email protected]
>Date: Mon, 24 Jul 1995 14:52:29 -0500
>I like it, except for "qIp". True, it's translated in the canon sentences as
>'hit', but the dictionary (102, 137) makes it "hit (with hand, fist, implement)
>(v)", so I don't think it works well for (what we call) "hit" by driving a car.
> (Now, if a giant picked up the car and swung it at the pedestrian "qIp"
>would be just right! }}};-)\ )
>I prefer "paw'" 'collide':
> bong yItwI' paw'moHlaHpu'.
>I'm sure some will dislike my giving a ("direct") object to a verb whose
>gloss requires a preposition in English. }}}:-Q\
It's not that I mind the object where English uses a preposition, but the
causative confuses me. "The driver might have caused a pedestrian to
collide" Huh? Caused the pedestrian to collide... with what? Or just by
himself?
Trouble is the transitivity, which we don't really know (it was brought up
at the qep'a'). Does "paw'" mean "to collide (with something else)"? If
so, I'd say "chaq yItwI' paw'", taking the object of "paw'" to be the thing
collided with (*English* uses a preposition; it seems very natural not to
have on in Klingon). Or does "paw'" mean "the subject(s) collide with one
another" (i.e. "The ship collided with me" would be translated as "mapaw'
Duj jIH je")? If so, it would be "chaq paw' yItwI' ghaH je." Eitehr way,
I don't see the "-moH" really helping.
~mark