tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 16 08:25:29 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Confusion and unconditional surrender (was: vocabulary..)
- From: hfp95118 <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Confusion and unconditional surrender (was: vocabulary..)
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 1995 15:54:07 +0000 (GMT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "d'Armond Speers" at Nov 16, 95 04:47:53 am
>
> On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Alan Anderson wrote:
>
> > vanya writes:
> > >*slipper*meywIj mojpu' no'lI' SurghDu' ;P
> > >
> > I like it! Though I think it's not quite an insult. It's more of a taunt.
> > If you want to emphasize an "I did it" meaning, you can say something like
> > {waqHom moj no'lI' SurghDu' 'e' vIqaSmoHta'}. I've taken the liberty of
> > using the word {waqHom} here; I hope it fits what you want it to mean.
> >
> > --ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj
Um, I'm not sure *waqHom* really conveys what I was trying to say -
basically apart from the humiliation of being made into slippers in the
first instance, slippers are inherently _delicate_ (implying "your
ancestors had soft skins" which I imagine is hardly complimentary to a
Klingon), which *waqHom* aren't necessarily.
Sheer pickiness aside, that's pretty much what I wanted to say, thanks :)
Unfortunately by the time I'd managed to pronounce all that, I'd be
wearing a pretty hole in my chest :( ... one day I will compose the
perfect Klingon insult... AND IT WILL BE *SHORT* >:)
> Um, excpet for that pesky TKD 6.2.5, "In complex sentences of this type
> [sentence as object], the second verb never takes an aspect suffix
> (section 4.2.7)". Aspect needs to come from the verb in the sentence
> which is the object of /qaS/.
>
> --Holtej
Oops, caught speeding by the grammar police... ;)
vanya
************************************************************************
Chris Atherton
[email protected]
"OOoooooeeeeeEEEE eeeeoo? Ooo oooee EE
eeoooo". - Tiny Clanger.
************************************************************************