tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 17 15:10:12 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Using weather verbs
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Using weather verbs
- Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 18:10:10 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Robyn Stewart" at Jun 16, 97 10:53:26 am
According to Robyn Stewart:
>
> There seems to be unnecessary anguish in this group about how to
> use the verbs peD and SIS. Here is my logic.
SISlu'. peDlu'.
> 1. The verbs exist, ergo they are usable.
> 2. They must take some subject.
SISlu'. peDlu'.
> We don't know whether it is 'eng,
> chal, muD, some other noun held rsponsible for precipitation, or a
> vague 'oH. Perhaps it doesn't matter.
SISlu'. peDlu'.
> 3. In Klingon a subject that is obvious or doesn't matter can be
> omitted. If there is a specific subject we should be using, then it
> is obvious and needn't be stated. If it doesn't matter, then it
> doesn't matter, so it needn't be stated.
If the subject doesn't matter, use the {-lu'} suffix.
> 4. Therefore SIS probably means "It rains, it rained, it's going to
> rain"
ghaytan bIlugh, 'ach jatlhlu'chugh <<SISlu'>> lughlu'ba'.
> Now stop agonizing about what the sunject of SIS might be. There are
> much hairier possibilities to agonize over. Weather
> can be idiomatic to the point of cute. Perhaps SISlu' is correct.
HIja'!
> Perhaps the implied subject is plural but the snow is singular and
> must be the object: lupeD.
taQqu' qechvam.
> Maybe tlhIngan Hol uses an impenetrable
> idiom for its weather terminology and you'd sound stilted unless you
> said "ghargh may'morgh SISnISlu'bogh Qoy' voDleH targh."
taQqu' qechvam je... 'ach ... vIparHa'!
> VancouverDaq DaHjaH SISbe'.
*Charlottesville*Daq DaH SISlu'be', ach wa'maH loS vatlh rep
SISqu'lu'.
charghwI'