tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 25 21:00:01 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: Practicing...

jatlh mIqIraH:

> > > DalaDlaH vIneH!
> > 
> > vIlaDlaHchu'!
> 
> DalaDlaHchu' 'e' jIQuchbej.
> 
> I am a bit uncertain about this sentance.  Does the {'e'} translate 100%
> 1:1 with "that?"  Obviously, I want to say, "I am certainly happy that
> you can read them perfectly."  Did I get it right?

You are right to be uncertain.  There are two problems here.  The first is 
that you used an object meaning "no object" when you have {'e'}, which 
requires that the following verb have a prefix which means "third-person 
singular object."

But the big mistake is that you have any object on {Quch} at all!  Remember, 
{'e'} is not a sentence conjunction, it's an object.  Just like a noun can be 
an object.  So, if {'e'} is like any other object, what would *{targh vIQuch} 
mean, for instance?  "I am happy the targ?"  Nonsense!  And it doesn't mean 
that I cause the targ to be happy, because that would be {targh vIQuchmoH}.

So, since we cannot use a sentence-as-object with a stative verb like {Quch}, 
what do we do?  When someone makes this mistake, a recast is in order:

DalaDlaHchu'mo' jIQuchbej.
Because you can read it perfectly, I am quite definitely happy.

> > bIlugh.
> > motlh mu'tlheghHommey neH ghItlh taghwI'pu'.
> > Do'Ha'.
> > bIqeqtaH 'e' yImevQo'!
> > "KLBC" Dayajchu'.
> > tlhIngan Hol laHlIj DaDubba'lI'!
> 
> qatlho'!  I was pretty happy when I sat down to translate this.  I
> actually understood a lot of the words (but I still don't have all of
> the affixes memorized), so I could get the gist of it without even
> opening the Dictionary.  Of course, I did open it, just to make sure...

Qu'vatlh!
mu'tlheghmeywIj DalaDba'ta', 'ach chojangmeH DIvI' Hol Dalo' jay'!
tlhIngan Hol yIjatlhchoH!
qara'!

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97232.6

Back to archive top level