tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 29 23:59:08 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: peDtaH 'ej jIQuch
- From: "Neal Schermerhorn" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: peDtaH 'ej jIQuch
- Date: Sun, 30 Nov 1997 02:38:20 -0500
ghItlh ~mark:
>>In a message dated 97-11-15 03:56:06 EST, ghunchu'wI' writes:
>>
>><< > wa'maH cha' Hu' peDchoH muD.
>> > peDtaHqu' 'e' buq chal.
>> > loQ taDchoH Hemey. >>
>>
>>Third: {buq} does not have to have a solid Object. The Object may be "It
>>was going to keep snowing a lot." This also nicely covers the lack of a
>>Klingon infinitive.
>
>Sorry, I'm missing something. I can't find "buq" anyplace. I don't have
>my KGT here, but I thought my word-list from it was complete. Anyone?
Only thing I can figure is it's a misspelling of <buQ> - that seems to fit
his commentary.
*peDtaHqu' 'e' buQ chal = The sky threatens that snowing will continue a
lot.
Can a sky threaten as <buQ> probably means? <jagh buQ SuvwI'> The object in
common usage is not the threat, but the threatened. In my guess at
ghunchu'wI''s usage, the sentence is the threat, and so not a valid object.
Or is there any canon to either side? Or have I guessed incorrectly to begin
with?
I wish we had clearer information as to what objects the various Klingon
verbs can take. That is perhaps the most valuable piece of information about
this language we could get. Imagine if we had canon examples of every verb!
Qermaq