tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 12 12:44:38 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: story, part 4
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: RE: story, part 4
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 96 13:47:42 EST
ja' SuStel:
> > jatlhtaHvIS DareS, cholchuq Hoch.
> Hmmm . . . {cholchuq} would probably mean "get closer each other," not "get
> closer *to* each other." Been reading the {jaH} thread?
> I suggest {jatlhtaHvIS DareS, botlhchajDaq chol Hoch}. Anyone have a better
> idea?
How about simply {chol Hoch}?
> > "DISvam botaH 'e' vIQubbe'.
> This time, I believe {taH} is intransitive (or at least, hasn't been shown to
> work transitively yet). You "survive," you don't "survive something."
> qaStaHvIS DISvam SutaH 'e' vIQubbe'.
I thought this would have been a good place to use {SIQ}, or maybe
even {SIQlaH}.
> > ra'bogh ghomDaq Qam mangHompu'.
> Hmmm . . . what are you doing with {ra'bogh ghomDaq}? I know you mean "in
> formation," but I read it as "in a group which commands." Maybe {lobrupbogh
> ghomDaq Qam mangHompu'} "in a group which is ready to obey."
If I read "battle array" right, how about {chenta' mangHom may'morghHom}?
> > "wa'DIch 'Iv?"
> {wa'DIch} must always follow a noun (unless, of course, you're singing {taHjaj
> wo'}).
"Always"? We know that numbers can stand alone as nouns, and we also
know that {cha'DIch} works by itself in at least one case. Why
shouldn't {wa'DIch} be permitted to mean something like "first one"?
> You must also use a "to be" construction.
> 'Iv ghaH SuvwI' wa'DIch'e'?
la''a' ghaH. mu'tlhegh poD lo' neHchugh lo'laHbej jay'!
> > pay' much'egh 'eb.
> "An opportunity presents itself" is an English saying. We know from TKW p. 51
> that Klingons "capture" opportunities. At first, I was going to suggest
> {nargh 'eb} "an opportunity appears," but this also means "an opportunity
> escapes," which is exactly what a Klingon says when referring to a missed
> opportunity.
Hey, I like this particular ambiguity a lot! {ghaHvaD nargh 'eb}
would imply that the "appearance/escape" was a good thing, right?
> I don't know; maybe {much'egh 'eb} would make sense to a Klingon. Or {'eb
> legh velqa}. I doubt that something which is to be captured would be worth
> much if it "presented" itself (I mean, where's the fun in capturing something
> which is *asking* to be captured?).
{pay' 'eb jon velqa}. nap, qar'a'?
> majQa'! lutvam vItIvqu'taH! qonwI' po'qu' SoHbej!
nIvbej lutvam.
vIyajmeH yap pab, 'ej Dun qechmey.
jIQochbe'; lugh SuStel: bIqonchu'!
-- ghunchu'wI'