tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon May 20 11:33:39 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhob mughwI' & KLBC
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: tlhob mughwI' & KLBC
- Date: Mon, 20 May 1996 20:28:08 +0200
At 08:23 AM 5/18/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>> At 06:26 AM 5/16/96 -0700, you wrote:
>> >DaHjaj "It doesn't matter when I receive it" vIjatlh vIneHpu'.
>> >mu'tlheghvam vIlo'pu': {potlhbe' vIHevDI' qastaHbogh poH'e'}.
>>
>> "I want that I write {<snip>} today"
>Or "Today I wanted to write {<snip>}". English uses past tense for this
>construct where Klingon has no tense, and the adverb can go anywhere, but makes
>most sense at the beginning.
>
>> "I use sentences: {A periode of time which is continues when I receive
>> unimportant}"
>{mu'tlheghvam} is "this sentence". "sentences" would be {mu'tlheghmey}.
>
>{potlh} is a verb. {potlhbe'} means "is not important".
>{qaS} mans "occur". So you get:
>
>"The period of time which is occurring when I receieve it is not important".
>
>> {vIHevDI', qastaHbogh poH'e', potlhbe'}
>The word order here is wrong... the thing that is not important, {poH}, is
>the subject, and thus comes after the verb {potlh}.
I didn't know, could you please explain why I couldn't use ",". Would
{vIHevDI', potlhbe' qastaHbogh poH'e'} be correct?
>> Would {-Daq} added to {poH'e'}, thus making it {poH'e'Daq}, be possible,
>> because how I see it you are IN the periode of time, thus located there in?
>As far as we know, {-Daq} can refer only to a spatial relationship, not a
>temporal one. We use "in" to mean both in English, but Klingon is not English.
>Note the translation of "A thousand throats may be cut in one night by a
>running man" in the back of TKD. It's not {wa' ramDaq}; it's
>{qaStaHvIS wa' ram} - "while one night occurs." Also, in this case, I'm
>not talking about what happens in the period of time - I'm talking about the
>period of time itself. As soon as you put {-Daq} on something, it can't be
>the subject of the sentence anymore, and we're left without anything to talk
>about.
I would just like to quote ghunchu'wI':
"If ''Rage against'' is the command, how about just {mIqta'Daq peQeHqu'}?
''Be very angry towards the machinery.'' {-Daq} is a general-purpose
locative suffix, and can indicate position, destination, direction, or
other similar ideas."
>> I'm not sure about{-'e'}, would it be wrong to remove it, when I placed
>> {-Daq} on the word {poH}?
>No, it would not be wrong; it would be necessary. Both {-'e'} and {-Daq} are
>type 5 suffixes; you cannot have two suffixes of the same type on any word at
>the same time.
Ah, thanks for that.
>> Forgive my poor translation, I've just started to understand Klingon.
>No forgiveness necessary. manIDmo' maghoj.
Qapla'
beHwI"av