tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 24 15:06:35 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

RE: (KLBC) *Iowa*vo' jabbI'ID



January 24, 1997 11:51 AM EST, jatlh HomDoq:

> qaStaHvIS Soch tera' jar, yoS *Iowa*Daq jISaHtaH.
> 
> I have been in Iowa for seven months now.
> lit.: while seven earth-months occurred, I was continuously present
>       in the district Iowa.

maj.

> (I'm using {yoS} to indicate what type of object "Iowa" denotes,
> and I didn't want to use {yIn}, because a) I don't remember what
> the conclusion of the discussion about using {yIn} for "live at"
> was and b) the INS might object to me using something that sounds
> like "permanent residency" :)

INS?

I don't have a problem with using {yIn}, personally.  It might be waxing a 
little poetic, or technical, but if you have been residing in a specific 
place, you *have* been alive there . . .

> pImqu' juHyoSwIj.
> 
> It's very different from home.
> lit.: My home-district is very different.

maj.

> vaj jIlISnIStaH.
> 
> Therefore, I have to adapt.
> lit.: Thus I need to adjust.
> 
> (I'm still in the process of adjusting.)

maj.

> qaStaHvIS rInpu'bogh DISmey, tujqu' DISpoH tuj, 'ach motlh tujqu'be'.
> 
> Although the last couple of summers were very hot, they usually aren't.
> lit.: during the years that are finished, the hot time of the year
>       was very hot, but usually it isn't.
> 
> (I don't know about {motlh} as an adverbial; I've added it to the list
> in the addendum, but didn't write down the source :( ; there should be 
> a more concise way to express the idea of this sentence)

Yes, {motlh} is an adverbial (SkyBox SP3).

Why more concise?  It's about as concise as your English original, right?

> *Iowa*Daq QaDHa'qu' je.
> 
> In Iowa they're also very humid.
> lit.: In Iowa, they are very undry as well.

maj.  Referring to the summers, right?

> *Iowa*Daq DISpoH bIr bIr law', juHDaq DISpoH bIr bIr puS.
> 
> The winters at home are less cold than the ones in Iowa.
> lit.: The cold time of the year in Iowa is colder than the cold time
>       of the year at home.
> 
> (I'm not sure if this is grammatical, would I have to say s.th. like
> {*Iowa*Daq qaSbogh DISpoH} ? see also the subject line, is it ok?)

I don't think that a noun with {-Daq} can modify another noun like this, no.  
But they don't need to here.

*Iowa* DISpoH bIr bIr law', juHwIj DISpoH bIr bIr puS.

That's rather fun to say!

No, I don't like the subject line.  If you want a sentence, you can say:

*Iowa*vo' jabbI'ID vIlab.

> HIvtaH SuS bIrqu'!
> 
> A very cold wind keeps attacking!
> lit.: A very cold wind attacks continuously!
> 
> (I can live with the lit., if the "again and again" meaning cannot
> be expressed - but I would prefer to see how it might be done :)

I'm not sure what you think is wrong.  This sentence looks good to me.

> juHDaq ngem law' law' *Iowa*Daq ngem law' puS.
> 
> Iowa has less forests than home.
> lit.: there are more forests at home than there are forests in Iowa.

Again, use a possessive:

juH ngem law' law' *Iowa* ngeM law' puS.

> (sim. to above maybe {juHDaq ngem tu'lu'bogh}?)

Not needed.  If you're talking about it, it probably exists.

> *Switzerland*Daq HuD ngech joq tu'lu'be' net Sov.
> 
> We all know, that Switzerland is flat.
> lit. One knows that there are no mountains or valleys in Switzerland.
> 
> (See "Asterix in Switzerland" :)

I've only read one Asterix story.  Sorry.

> *Iowa*Daq rap.
> 
> It's the same with Iowa.
> lit.: In Iowa it is the same.
> 
> (I could have said {rap *Iowa*}, but I wanted to keep it in the same
> position as the thing I'm comparing it to, which was Switzerland and
> appeared as *...*Daq)

What is the same?  Your subject is too vague.

*Iowa*Daq rap ghu'vam.

Then again, this may be because I'm reading your statements one sentence at a 
time.

> 'ach 'IH *Iowa*.
> 
> Nevertheless, Iowa is a nice place. :-)
> lit.: But Iowa is beautiful.

maj.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97067.6


Back to archive top level