tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 27 13:34:29 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC> Mixed Nits
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC> Mixed Nits
- Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 16:51:59 -0600
David Wood writes:
>>>mu'meyqoqvammo' vuDmeyraj nuq? peyuDHa' 'ach <vIparHa'> DIjatlh.
>
>>Hmm... {nuq} *does* act as a pronoun, so maybe it can be a verb,
>>but I'd prefer {...nuq 'oH vuDmeyraj'e'}, or {...vuDmeyraj yIja'}.
Of course, I *meant* to suggest {...nuq _bIH_ vuDmeyraj'e'}. However,
I think the "command" form using {yIja'} is truer to the "spirit" of
the language.
>I was trying to use the only "to be" form I knew: in the same way that
>"tlhIngan
>jIH" would be "I am a klingon," I thought that "vuDmeyraj nuq?" would be "What
>are your opinions?" Unless jIH and the other pronouns are also verbs...
They're treated like verbs when using them to mean "to be". They can
have verb suffixes; the audiotape Conversational Klingon gives as an
example {tlhIngan jIHbe'} "I am not a Klingon" (to be used as a call for
help, indicating that maybe you don't enjoy the pain you are suffering).
I don't know any canon usage of {nuq} as a verb, though there is support
for {'Iv} as a verb: the canon {SoH 'Iv} would be backwards otherwise.
>>{DIjatlh} confuses me. "Be honest, but we speak them 'I like it.'"
>>I think you wanted a different prefix here, but I'm not sure what
>>it would be.
>
>"Be honest, but say 'I like them'" vIjatlh vInIDpu'. lughbe'chu' moHaq. jI'oy'!
vaj moHaq lughchu' Daja'nIS. yIbuDQo'.
When using a sentence as an object, you must use {'e'} or {net} to refer
the the first sentence unless the second verb is {neH}. Here, you need to
say {"..." vIjatlh 'e' vInID}. Note also that in a construction like this,
the second verb cannot have a type 7 "aspect" suffix (see TKD 6.2.5, page
66, about a third of the way down the page). {-pu'} seems inappropriate
here anyway. I don't think you intend to indicate that you are finished
trying; you probably mean merely that you tried.
>reH latlh qabDaq qul tuj law' Hoch tuj puS!
(Forgive me if this is a "well-known" replacement proverb; I've never seen
this sentence before, so I have to read this as I see it.)
Something is always hottest, but I'm not sure what. Fire on another's face?
{latlh qabDaq qul} is a bit cryptic. In a "normal" sentence, the locative
would have a verb to attach to, but in a {law'/puS} construction, I'm not
sure how to deal with it. However, I suppose if I accept {reH} in front of
a {law'/puS}, I can accept a locative as well. So I can read it as:
{reH latlh qabDaq (qul tuj law' Hoch tuj puS)}.
"Fire is always hottest on anothers' (someone else's) face." Okay, fine.
>(yItu': "D'oh!" jImughlaHbe'meH <jI'oy'> jIjatlh.)
This sounds like you are intentionally avoiding being able to translate.
"D'oh! In order to be unable to translate, I say 'I hurt.'" First,
you probably meant {vImugh...}. Second...
>(yItu'taH: mu'tlheghvetlhDaq lugh'a' "-meH"?)
Not if you meant "*because* I can't translate 'D'oh'..." See the addendum
section 4.2.9 for the verb suffix {-mo'} meaning "because".
Why did you write {yItu'taH}? Did you perhaps mean {yItu'qa'}?
>-- David Wood, Freelance Computer Consultant
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj