tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 06 15:10:41 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: Re: Hov veSmey

jatlh SuSDuj (gads, I've created quite a trend here!):

> tlhingan Hol jIjatlhbe' *yet*, *sorry*!

Ah!  There's a word for "not yet"!  It's {wej}!  And adverbials (look at TKD 
5.4) always come first:

wej tlhIngan Hol vIjatlh.
I do not speak Klingon yet.

Note that I used the verb prefix {vI-} instead of {jI-}.  {tlhIngan Hol} is 
the object of the verb {jatlh}, and is third-person singular.  Looking at the 
chart on TKD page 33, we find {vI-} in that spot!

Make sure you capitalize every {I}!  i get really annoyed when i'm having a 
conversation with someone, and i have to tell them to capitalize their {I}s!  
it's weird to read, isn't it?  :)
 
> I have been lurking on this newsgroup for some weeks and find it
> very interesting. Especially SuStel's excellent command of grammar

We need a word for "blush"!  SuDchoH SuStel DIr . . .

> and ability to explain it is a great help. One of my hobbies is 
> learning languages and with Startrek being one of the others ...
> 
> I'm wondering about the compound nouns in *tlhingan Hol*. In German
> (my 2nd language) there are many and new compound nouns are formed 
> all the time.
> 
> I'm refering to SuStel's answer Re: Hov veSmey Fri Feb 14 05:21 MET 1997
> 
> > {yav Duj} is an acceptable substitute for "land-speeder," I suppose, 
> > although it could be equally applicable to a car with wheels. 
> 
> Exact translation of land-speeder aside:
> in German one would form a new compound *yavDuj* to mean land-speeder.
> Is such a usage permitted or even encouraged in *tlhingan Hol*? 
> (Following the lines of *jolpa'*)

Sometimes.  In this case, {yavDuj} seems an excellent compound, as we already 
have {veQDuj}, {toDDuj}, {may'Duj}, and, less relevantly, {toQDuj} and 
{qughDuj} (and any others which I may have missed).

However, you don't want to compound just any noun.  Only do so if you feel the 
words, put together, would create a word which might actually be lexicalized.  
This is not a rule, but a guideline I feel is important, as it makes 
understandable words.  One does not, for example, create the compound 
*{tlhInganHol}.  It's all really a matter of judgement.  If people aren't 
understanding your compounds, lay off a little.  (Personally, I find that I 
rarely need to create a compound.)

> Hm, I'm working off what seems to be a German translation of parts of TKD,
> so perhaps I've got the next one wrong:
> I'm refering to the sentence: 
>      He moves his hand when he speaks.
> SuStel leads us to the translation: 
>      ghopDaj nechmoH loQ jatlhDI'. 
> (which is perfectly ok with me for the sentence given)
> (btw, did I place *loQ* right?)

No, adverbials come before the verb then modify.  You'd need to say

loQ ghopDaj nechmoH jatlhDI'

> But I would rather expect something like "while" 
> instead of "when, as soon as": 
>      He moves his hand (a little) while he is speaking.
> so I'd be inclined to use *-vIS*  instead of *-DI'* (and observe
> that *-vIS* always goes with *-taH*): 
>      ghopDaj nechmoH (loQ) jatlhtaHvIS.

It's a different meaning.  If I said,

loQ ghopDaj nechmoH jatlhtaHvIS,

it essentially means he moves his hand just one time sometime during the 
period he spends talking.  If I say,

loQ ghopDaj nechmoHtaH jatlhtaHvIS,

it means he continuously (and probably aimlessly) moves his hand all the while 
that he speaks.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97178.0

Back to archive top level