tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 18 21:59:09 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC Challenge: similar suffixes
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC Challenge: similar suffixes
- Date: Thu, 18 Dec 1997 21:58:49 -0800
At 21:22 97-12-18 -0800, ~mark wrote:
}>Date: Tue, 16 Dec 1997 02:22:35 -0800 (PST)
}>From: Qov <[email protected]>
}>At 21:16 97-12-15 -0800, SuStel wrote:
}>
}>}>bIpujmo' QaghlIjmo' bIbIQ
}>}>(Because you are weak, you are sad because of your mistake.)
}>}>[That last one was tough. I hope I came close.]
}>}
}>}This is the second double {-mo'} sentence I've seen in response to Qov's
}>}challenge so far, and I must say it looks icky to me. I can see why Scott
}>}had trouble with it. It doesn't break any known rules, but it doesn't seem
}>}to want to do that. You're giving two causes in two different formats: verb
}>}and noun. These are two causes of the same event, yet you cannot join them
}>}with any sort of conjunction.
}>
}>I quite liked it. I see the acceptable sentence {QaghlIjmo' bI'IQ} with the
}>acceptable clause {bIpujmo'} explaining the reason for the second sentence.
}>bIpujbe'chugh QaghlIjmo' bI'IQbe'. HoSwI' nuQbe' QaghDaj. If both the noun
}>and the verb were indicated as caues of the same effect it would certainly
}>be icky, as occured with the one who tried to fit all ten suffixes into one
}>sentence. :)
}
}I can see the difficulty. I'm not completely sure Klingon would sweat such
}a detail, but maybe. I would put both -mo's in a sentence thusly (maybe I
}should say I have a sentence that has one -mo' and then one mo'?)
}
}verenganmo' Qaghmo' HoD, ghaH naDHa' ta'.
}
}The Emperor discommended the captain because he (the captain) made a
}mistake because of the Ferengi.
Exactly. If one thing caused another and it caused something else, there is
no problem. The problem comes in when someone tries to say "I left because
of the targs and because I was cold." What conjunction do you use?
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian