tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 21 10:41:02 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Hell hath no fury...
>Date: Wed, 20 Mar 1996 15:49:30 -0800
>From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
>According to [email protected]:
>>
>> be' temlu'pu'bogh rurbogh QeH ghajbe' ghe''or.
Hrm... I seem to have missed the original post for some reason. Maybe it's
out of order or something at my site.
>"The netherworld does not have anger which resembles a woman who
>has been denied." I suggest that a woman does not resemble
>anger, no matter how denied she has been.
Yes... This is a strangeness of the English, which should by rights have
been "...like that of a woman scorned." Unless, of course, as correctly
pointed out (I don't have the posting in front of me, forgive me for not
quoting the person) it more likely refers to a Fury as in Alecto,
Tisiphone, and Megaera (those right?) of mythology. In which case "QeH" is
probably not the Right Thing.
>I also feel a little squirmy about this use of "deny". I deny a
>fact or a request, but I'm not sure I deny a woman.
Yeah...
>> be' qImbe'lu'bogh ral law' ghe''or ral puS.
>"A woman who has not been concentrated (?) is more violent than
>the netherworld." I suggest that {qIm} is much less obviously
>transitive than {buS}. Also, I suggest that the violence is
>much less an attribute of the netherworld than an attribute of
>the occupants thereof.
I'm not sure that qIm is bad; buS may be better... *shrug*. Maybe "qu'"
for "ral"?
>Perhaps:
>be''e' buSHa'bogh bangqoqDaj ral law' ghe'orDaq Hoch ral puS.
Pretty good.
~mark