tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 11 15:42:07 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC:vIttlhegh [ST:K]
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC:vIttlhegh [ST:K]
- Date: Thu, 11 Jul 1996 17:46:14 -0500
Note: I have corrected the spelling of the subject line from {vItlhegh}.
nuqHm writes:
>Act and you shall have dinner.
>Think and you shall become dinner.
>
>bIDachugh 'uQ Daghaj.
>bIQubchugh 'uQ Damoj
I think you've seen that {vang} is probably a better choice than {Da} here.
>[Re-cast with ifs ...
Perfectly appropriate in this case, similar to {bIjeghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh}.
Perhaps adding {vaj} might improve your sentences; perhaps not.
>...with hindsight oughtn't moj to have a change of state vsx ?
I don't think so. {moj} already implies a change of state; to add {-choH}
would probably make it refer to the start of the transformation.
> I don't have TKD with me !]
Is this supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing? :-)
>bIDa 'ej 'uQ Daghaj.
>bIQub 'ej 'uQ Damoj.
These fall a bit flat. The english phrasing is "Do this, and that happens."
To mirror that phrasing, you need to put an imperative prefix on the first
verb. But there's no evidence that such phrasing in Klingon gives the same
kind of "if-then" implication that is seen in english, while we do have the
contrary examples of the more explicit {bI-X-chugh vaj bI-Y}.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj