tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 26 20:35:12 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: lut tlhaQ



ja' Qov:
>I won't argue with your sense of style, and there is nothing wrong with
>saying wa' loD, but the translation of "A man goes into a bar" *is* "tach
>'el loD."

jang ter'eS:
>I didn't mean it was a direct translation. It just has for me the same
>sort of "Get ready for this..." feel that "A man goes into a bar" has.
>On the other hand, since Klingon nouns don't need plural suffixes, "tach
>'el loD" could also mean "(Some) men walk into a bar".  It might not be a
>bad idea to set the scene a little more clearly before going on.

No, "Some men walk into a bar" is {tach lu'el loD}.  The ambiguity with
{tach 'el loD} is that it also can mean "A man enters bars" or "Men enter
bars."  If you put {wa'} in there, you explicitly are saying either "*One*
man enters a bar" or "*One* man enters bars."  If you leave it off, you
lose the sense of focus on the number of men that using implies to me.

-- ghunchu'wI'




Back to archive top level