tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 03 15:46:28 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: "nuqneH" Sajatlh
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: "nuqneH" Sajatlh
- Date: Mon, 3 Mar 97 23:27:24 UT
qoror accidentally sent this to me only, not the list, so I'll include his
complete text, interspersed with my comments:
> Message text written by "David Trimboli"
> >> SaQaw'moH
> > I will give orders for your destruction.
>
> Nope. This is "I will cause all of you to destroy." You need to say
>
> lIQaw'lu'meH jIra'
> I command in order that you (plural) are destroyed.
> <
>
> When I wrote that, I just meant it as an interesting way of translating it.
Interesting, yes. Correct, no. It means exactly what I said it means, and
nothing else.
> In
> TKD, it gives one translation as "I cause a boarding party to be formed."
Note
> the "to be."
The "to be" is merely one of the correct ways to say it in English. Klingon
doesn't even *have* the verb "to be"!
tIjwI'ghom vIchenmoH
I form a boarding party.
I cause a boarding party to be formed.
The absolutely correct, connect the dots and have English and Klingon
correspond one-to-one translation would be "I cause a boarding to take form."
{chen} means "take form." Adding {-moH} means you "cause to take form."
> The literal way of translating my sentence would be "I will cause
> you to be destroyed."
No, it does not. {Qaw'} means "destroy," not "be destroyed." There's a world
of difference between these two.
> But you have to give orders for that kind of thing. And
> "I will give orders for your destruction" isa lot easier to say.
A really easy way to command this would be
peQaw''egh
Destroy yourselves!
Or, if they do it Erik the Viking style,
peQaw'chuq
Destroy each other!
> By the way, as long as I'm on the subject of "-moH," does anyone know how
you
> can use "-moH" with another object? Say "The captain made the gunner shoot
the
> enemy ship."
Some believe that you can just add the other object at the before the first
one. I have a problem with this ditransitivity, and do not recommend it. It
is not really supported in the language. And I've found that there is almost
always another way to say what you're trying to say.
jagh DujDaq bach baHwI' 'e' raD HoD.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97171.7