tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 24 20:18:55 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: *romangan*Daq mu'thleghmey val
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: *romangan*Daq mu'thleghmey val
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 23:35:03 -0600
Michael Rhodes writes:
>naDev jIchu'. *Mike* vIponglu'.
Oops, I almost missed one. I just found this message hiding at the bottom
of a dusty pile of bits. Welcome to the list, Mike! I'll give you the
abridged version of my spiel: I'm called ghunchu'wI' and I am the list's
Beginners' Grammarian. Catch my attention with "KLBC" in the subject of
a note, and I'll do my best to get back to you quickly.
>*romangan*Daq mu'tlheghmey val puS vImugh
>vIneHpu'. jiHvaD yIja' jIQaghchugh. Satlho'neS.
Hmm.. I can't quite tell if you are trying to use the verb suffix {-pu'}
correctly. It looks like you intend for it to indicate simple past tense,
but that's not what it means. Klingon has no "tense" as such; future, past,
and present are distinguished not by grammar but by context and time words
such as "ten o'clock", "yesterday", and "next year." What Klingon *does*
have is "aspect", describing whether an action is complete, ongoing, done
(as an intentional act), and so on. {vIneHpu'} means "I had wanted" and
it implies that the wanting was finished when the other events in the
sentence took place. Or it might mean that the wanting *will be* finished
when the other events *take* place. If you already understood this and you
indeed meant to use the perfective, I apologize for bending your ear, but
I think it's an important enough point that I will accept the possibility
that I am annoying you against the chance that I'm truly helping you.
However, there's another problem with this usage. The Klingon Dictionary
makes it quite clear (if you look closely) that in two-verb sentences such
as your {...vImugh vIneHpu'}, the second verb never takes a type 7 (aspect)
suffix like {-pu'}. See section 6.2.5, about a third of the way down page
66 at the end of the long paragraph.
>jatlhpu' *Terence*:
The use of {-pu'} is dubious here as well.
>qaSbe' Dochmey batlh, Qob tu'be'lu'chugh.
"Honor of things does not happen if one does not find danger."
I'm not familiar with the quote, so I'm not sure if this is right.
I think {Dochmey batlh} is in the wrong order; is it supposed to
be "things of honor"? This sentiment can probably be expressed
with {Qob tu'be'lu'chugh batlh tu'be'lu'}. "If there is no danger,
there is no honor." Putting the {-chugh} phrase first is merely
a stylistic choice, but it is the most common usage here.
>jatlhpu' *Publius Syrus*: tlhabbe' vay', porghDaj toy'chugh.
"If someone serves his body, he is not free." maj.
>jatlhpu' *Publius Syrus*: loQ bIQagh, DaSovbe'bogh DaSovchu'.
"You err slightly, you clearly know what you do not know." While
English needs the pronoun "what", Klingon instead has a verb suffix;
you have removed the pronoun, leaving the head noun of the relative
clause unspecified. It took me a few extra moments to figure out
what the object of {DaSovchu'} was supposed to be, since it isn't
written down anywhere. This might not actually be ungrammatical,
but it would certainly be easier to read if you had put something
concrete as the object.
>Qapla'
Well done. You already have a good handle on the basic grammar.
I hope to see more from you soon -- preferably your own words, and
not those of millenium-dead statesmen of a fallen empire. :-)
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj