tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 21 01:03:32 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: poH Dogh wIvlu'pu'
- From: "A.Appleyard" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: poH Dogh wIvlu'pu'
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 09:03:05 GMT
- Organization: Materials Science Centre
- Priority: normal
A.Appleyard wrote:-
> Star Trek Voyager 'ay' wa'DIch (paghDIch?) (= <pilot episode>) jIloSpu'qu',
D.Trimboli replied:-
> <vIloSpu'qu'> bIjatlh 'e' DaHech, qar'a'?
Sorry, slip-up by AA.
A.Appleyard wrote:-
> 'ej DaH 1996 Aug 26-Daq 'oH 'ang BBC TV2 (= England TV) ...
D.Trimboli replied:-
> August 26 is not now. Or do you mean that NOW they have SET the schedule to
> show the episode then?
Perhaps I should have put {... 'ang 'e' DaH nab BBC TV2 ..."}.
(I wanted future tense, but TKD says Klingon has no verb future tense and
verb futureness is decided by context. {'angqang} = "is willing to show",
{'angrup} = "is ready to show", but these are not plain futures. "will" in
English "I will write", Anglo-Saxon "ic will wri~tan", originally meant "is
willing to, wants or intends to, {-qang}", but gradually slid into being a
future tense.)
A.Appleyard wrote:-
> - 10.50 pm 12.20 am je jojDaq
D.Trimboli replied:-
> I'm not sure what {jojDaq} is doing here ..."In the middle of the night"?
"between 10.50 pm and 12.20 am" (or remove the -Daq, if necessary)
A.Appleyard wrote:-
> Qu'vatlh!! pemDaq vatlh Qu' vIghajmo', rammeyDaq jIQongnIS!!
{Qu' (wa')vatlh} = "duty #100". Did {Qu'vatlh} start as an annoyed remark by
an overworked workman?