tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Dec 05 11:31:06 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhoghtay
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: tlhoghtay
- Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 13:29:42 -0600
At 10:51 AM 12/5/97 -0800, ~mark wrote:
>>As for roSbogh, I have no idea where I found that word. I believe I was
>>trying to say "tie together" instead of "bind", but that still does not
>>explain the translation.
>>Should it then be:
>>thlIngan SuvwI'pu' cha' quv law' muv tlhoghtay wIleghmeH naDev maH.
>
>Lessee... The cha' numeral should go first, and if we are seeing the
>ceremony join them, we are seeing a whole sentence, so we need 'e' to link
>it:
>
>cha' tlhIngan SuvwI'pu' quv muv tlhoghtay 'e' wIleghmeH naDev maH.
>
(I just noticed this, so forgive my late posting)
I always thought {muv} meant 'join' in the sense of 'join up (with
a group)', as in {mang muv SuvwI'}. The verb {muvmoH} 'to recruit'
and noun {muvtay} 'initiation' make me think this even more strongly.
I would interpret the above sentence as the marriage joining up with
the warriors to form some sort of new group. For the intended meaning,
I think I'd go with {muvmoH}, as in "the ceremony causes the warriors
to unite" (or maybe even {muvchuqmoH} or something with {tay'}).
Am I missing something obvious?
-- ter'eS