tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 23 20:09:54 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC:Web/Warriors
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC:Web/Warriors
- Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 23:05:15 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: William H. Martin <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, December 23, 1997 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: KLBC:Web/Warriors
>According to Tamise Totterdell:
>> yIqu' SuvwI'pu' Warriors be fierce
>> yIHem SuvwI'pu' Warriors be proud
>> yIHos SuvwI'pu' Warriors be strong
>> yIquv SuvwI'pu' Warriors be honored
>
>majQa'.
Not quite. Since you are addressing multiple warriors, you need the
imperative prefix which indicates that: {pe-}.
pequ' SuvwI'pu'
peHem SuvwI'pu'
etc.
Now, while these are grammatically correct, they are not the best way to say
it. In Klingon for the Galactic Traveler, page 117, Okrand tells us:
"Generally, when a verb describing a state of being (for example, {tuj} ['be
hot']) is used in the imperative form, the suffixes {-'egh} (reflexive
suffix) and {-moH} ('cause') are used as well: {yItuj'eghmoH} ('Heat
yourself!'--that is, 'Cause yourself to be hot!')."
Now, it just falls to us to determine exactly which verbs describe states of
being. {HoS} and {quv} obviously are. I would guess that {qu'} and {Hem}
are, too, though you *could* make the argument that being fierce and being
proud are actions, and not simply states. If they've ever been used
adjectivally, I'd call them states. ({qu' is used adjectivally in KGT [see
p.160], but I'm not sure if {Hem} ever has been. I wouldn't be at all
surprised if it could be, though.)
Thus, we get:
pequ''eghmoH SuvwI'pu'
Cause yourselves to be fierce!
Be fierce!
peHem'eghmoH
Cause yourselves to be fierce!
Be proud!
peHoS'eghmoH
Strengthen yourselves!
Be strong!
pequv'eghmoH
Honor yourselves!
Be honored!
>That last one sounds a little strange, since being
>honored is to be the recipient from someone else of honor. How
>you can command this, I'm not sure. It's sort of like an
>imperative passive voice. They don't mix all that well.
The problem seems to be that Tamise has mistaken "be honored" for "be
honorable." The literal meaning of {pequv'eghmoH} illustrates the source of
your misgivings. One honors oneself by acting honorably, so the phrase
*does* work in a certain way. Otherwise, say {batlh pevang} "Act
honorably!"
SuStel
Stardate 97979.9