tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 13 19:02:35 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nabwIj - tlhIngan wo' batlh
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: nabwIj - tlhIngan wo' batlh
- Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 22:04:24 -0500
charghwI' writes:
>> >wa'DIch, *pIcarD* wIHoHnIS
>>
>> This "adverbial" use of {wa'DIch} isn't mentioned in TKD, and I don't know
>> of any canon examples of it. I don't like it.
>
>While I didn't like it at first as well, I distinctly remember
>a canon example recently (probably on one of those cards Okrand
>wrote) where he used this word adverbially. I'll try to look
>this one up later...
>From Skybox card S15 (by way of HolQeD 4:3):
{wa'DIch tlhIngan Dujmey luleghlu'pu'bogh rur...}
"Similar in configuration to the first Klingon vessels encountered..."
>From the translation, I tend to view this as a simple error in Okrand's
placement of the word {wa'DIch}. It should obviously have come *after*
{tlhIngan Dujmey}, not before them. If it were being used adverbially,
I would expect the translation to have been more along the lines of
"...the Klingon vessels first encountered...."
>There are others who tend to remember canon citations better
>than I do, so if anyone comes up with this before me, great.
I keep my HolQeD collection handy. You should see my "Klingon suitcase"
full of reference material! Perhaps you will in a few months. :-)
>I respect the volume the BG handles and the high percentage of
>excellent responses. Just keeping you honest...
reH jIyuDHa'! chaq rut loQ nargh QaghHommeyHeywIj puS, 'ach not jIyuD!
law'law' taghwI'pu'. muQopmoHbej Qu'vam. jIDoy'choHtaH 'ach jItaHnIS.
batlhwIj vIleHnISqu'!
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj