tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 28 14:44:30 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jIHem (was loDHompu')
According to [email protected]:
>
> ja' r'Hul
> > tlhIngan [cleavage]wIj vIHem.
I'm among those who doesn't think this works.
> ja' yoDtargh
> > You could say:{tlhIngan [cleavage]wIjmo' jIHem.}
I think this works fine. Your cleavage makes you proud.
> jang r'Hul
> > But that changes what I meant. I'm not proud because of them. I'm proud of
> them. }}:-)
While the words have changed, I think the meaning is the same.
They cause you to be proud. You are proud because of them.
> jang yoDtargh
> > Perhaps it would be more accurate to say:
> mubelqu'moH tlhIngan [cleavage]wIj -or-
ghobe'. jIH mubelqu'moH tlhIngan [cleavage]lIj. SoH DuHemmoH
tlhIngan [cleavage]lIj. muQuchmoHqu'. {{:)>
> tlhIngan [cleavage]wIjmo' jIbelqu' -or-
> muQuchmoH tlhIngan [cleavage]wIj
>
> Why not <muHemmoH tlhIngan [cleavage]wIj>.
maj.
> If you say that you're proud of something (or someone),
> don't you really feel pride becuse of your association
> with the object in question? I think <tlhIngan
> [cleavage]mo' jIHem> gets that idea across, qar'a'.
maQochbe'.
> qeltaHghach Hal bIHbogh moQmey'e' vIqIHmeH 'eb vIloSlaHbe'.
> (vIjatlhtaHvIS qevpobwIjDaq jatwIj vIlan.)
bIyepqu'. pa' jatlIj DalantaHvIS DuqIpchugh 'oy'qu' jatlIj.
> Brad
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |