tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Sep 28 15:43:33 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

(KLBC) RE: Klingon Martial Arts

Seeing as no one else corrected your grammar, I guess I get to be the lucky
one... {{:)

At 07:59 AM 9/5/96 -0700, Chet Braun wrote:
>
>That's an interesting point.  Do we have any recorded histories that one
>might look to to find out about changes in fighting strategies that go
>along with th e change in Empire.  
>----------------------------------
>[China]Daq ta'mo' choHbe'pu' tonSaw'
>QI' qumwIpu'mo' choHpu' tonSaw'
>QaSchaj ghojmoHpu' QI' qumwI'
>tonSaw' 


Your first three sentences look pretty good, except for the missing ' in
<qumwI'pu'mo'> in the second line.  In your last sentence, I wonder if you
are trying to say "The governors of the military taught martial arts to
their troops".  If so, you have <tonSaw'> out there, all by it's little
self.  It is really the OBJECT of the sentence, and "for their troops" is
the *indirect* object of the sentence.  In this case, you MUST use -vaD to
denote the Indirect object as is described on page 180:  put -vaD on the
indirect object, and put it before the object:

        QaSchajvaD tonSaw ghojmoH QI' qumwI'.

Please note that if you are talking about multiple military leaders, as the
use -chaj on <QaS> implies, you need the verb prefix lu- on <ghojmoH>, to
match the plural subject.


>Yes, I know, [tonSaw'] is strictly Klingon fighting but I figured it was a good
>substitute for Terran martial arts as well since they're so closely
related. >:-)


I have no problems with it, for lack of a better way to express the concept.


>----------------------------------
>
>The Chinese martial arts were
>originally taught as military tactics.  
>-----------------------------------
>teHbejbe' 'e'


Unfortunately, <'e'> can ONLY be used as the OBJECT of a verb.  This would
be a "sentence as subject" construction, and, as far as we know, Klingon
cannot do that.  Whenever you want to use <'e'> as anything other than the
object of a sentence, try replacing it with something a little bit more
specific:  "this/that"  followed by:  "situation" <ghu'>, "idea" <qech>,
"goal" <ngoQ>, "fact" <ngoD>, "event" <wanI'>.  I'd recommend:

        teHbejbe' ngoDvetlh
        "That idea is not certainly true"

Please also note that -be' negates whatever it follows; you said "not
certainly" not "certainly not" as you may have desired.


>---------------------------------
>
>Do the Klingon martial arts have a
>similar morphology?
>---------------------
>tonSaw'chaj ghojmoHtaH QI' qumwI'
>tonSaw'chaj ghojmoHtaH je qorDu''a'pu'
>tonSaw'chaj ghojmoHlu'taH je chIrghpu'Daq


Your first sentence is fine.  I think I touched in a previous post on the
use of -pu' on the word qorDu', and it may or may not still be bouncing
around the list... but I was always taught that while the individual members
of a family may be hes/shes, the family as a whole is an d IT.  Members of
the family can speak; the family as a whole cannot.  Since this is still
being argued, I am not going to say this is incorrect--this is just a
warning that -pu' on <qorDu'> may not be correct.

In your final sentence, you have <chIrghpu'Daq> at the very end.  Anytime
you have noun with the locative -Daq attached to it, it needs to go at the
beginning of the sentence.



>HetaQ


--tQ


P.S.:
>begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT

Is there any way this garbage can NOT be included with your posts?


--tQ


---
HoD trI'Qal, tlhIngan wo' Duj lIy So' ra'wI'
Captain T'rkal, Commander IKV Hidden Comet (Klingon speaker and net junkie!)
HaghtaHbogh tlhIngan yIvoqQo'!  toH... qatlh HaghtaH Qanqor HoD???
monlI'bogh tlhInganbe' yIvoqQo'!  SoHvaD monlI' trI'Qal...

Back to archive top level