tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 19 08:29:04 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Klingon on the Live TV channel, UK



>Date: Wed, 18 Oct 1995 12:13:27 -0700
>From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>

>According to [email protected]:
>> 
>> In a message dated 95-10-16 05:48:25 EDT, you write:
>> 
>> >DIS law'Daq tera' wISuvtaH.  vaj Doghjeychaj DIlajpu'.
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> I wish to solve a question for myself and have chosen your text as an example
>> of my own question.  I want to express "for many years."  Should I apply
>> {-Daq} as you have done here?  Should I simply say {DIS law' wISuv}?
>> 
>> I eagerly await comments from the experts.
>> 
>> peHruS

>My approach is to be as conservative, unpresumptive and
>explicit as I can so that anyone with TKD can figure out what
>I've said if they encounter a sentence I've written. For your
>intent, I would say:

>qaStaHvIS DIS law', tera' wISuv.

Mine too.  The other way I would probably accept (and I bet Okrand would do
it this way, but it's a little too daring for me to sanction in general) is
"DIS law' wISuv".  Using "-Daq" is likely wrong; we have evidence from
canon that you don't stick "-Daq" on temporal phrases (in "qaStaHvIS wa'
ram, loS SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD", Okrand had a perfect opportunity to
use a temporal "-Daq" but pointedly didn't, instead using a more complex
construction.)  It looks like "-Daq" is strictly spatial.

~mark


Back to archive top level