tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Dec 19 07:34:34 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: [repost] - lutHom



In article <[email protected]>,
William H. Martin <[email protected]> writes
>*BG* jIHpu' vaj DaH ja'nISba' pagh, 'ach 'eqlaw' pagh 'ej chaq 
>bIboHchoH. tlhIngan Hol neH vIlo'chugh vaj chaq qaQaHlaH 'ach 
>taghwI'pu' vInuQbe'.

jIboHchoHbe'... jISaH.

[vIpe']

>> ===
>> lutHom 'oH. 
>> 
>> nom meHDaq De'wI' ghun QeDpIn. 
>> pay' tlhopHomDaq So'Ha'law'pu' romuluSngan veSDuj 'e' jatlh ya.
>
>not lugh <<'e' jatlh>>. <<'e'>> yIchagh. 'ej <<tlhopHomDaq>>? 
>qatlh <<-Hom>> Dalo'? ram'a'? machchugh tlhopvam 'ach 
>potlhchugh, vaj <<-Hom>> Dalo'be'nIS. ramchugh yIlo'.

jIyaj.

{pay' tlhopDaq So'Ha'law'pu' romuluSngan veSDuj jatlh ya.}


>> HaStavaD mutlhob HoD. 

qay'. :-)

>>jIHeQta' 'a pagh tu'lu'! 
>> pIHbej HoD. wIyDaj 'olqa' 'e' ya ra' HoD.
>
>nuqjatlh? nuq 'oH wot <<ra'>> *object*? <<ya>>? <<'e'>>? wa' DoS 
>neH yIbuS. tlhIngan mu'ghom 'ay' jav DoD cha' DoD vagh 
>yIlaDqa'chu'! wej Dayajlaw'. tlhoS, 'ach jatlhlu'DI' reH bIQagh.

qay' 'e' vIyajbe'. 

* TKD 6.2.5 reread... and I now see that <'e' jatlh> is very wrong --
because we don't have indirect quotation... understood. However, I'm
still in a real mess when it comes to when the SAO acts as a /second/
object. <wiyDaj 'olqa'> (apparently) works fine for "he verifies his
tactical display again"... however, [and bear with me here, please! :-)]
I'm not sure how to express "s.o. orders s.o. to do sth." <ya ra' HoD>
could well be wrong "The cap'n orders the tactical officer" because it
reeks of <qagh ra' HoD> "The cap'n orders *qagh*". There doesn't seem to
be any suitable example. An *apparent* way from my POV would be to mark
the 'e' clause as indirect, but I think it's agreed that <'e'vaD> is
really bad news.

Maybe {wIyDaj 'olqa'meH ya, ra' HoD.}... but this still looks a little
icky. *

>> bejpu' ya.
>> QeDpInvaD yIt 'ej ngoqDaj ghun vInuD.
>
>qatlh QeDpInvaD yIt'a'? yItlaHbe''a' QeDpIn? chaq <<QeDpIn 
>ghoS>> Dalo' DaneH. <<gnoqDaj ghun vInuD>>? nuqjatlh? pagh 
>meqmo' cha' wot Dalo'pu'. yIQubqa'.

Okay... I'd change the first clause to {QeDpIn jIghoS}, and I understand
the motivation. 

Perhaps {mIw ghunpu'bogh} 'method in which he programmed'?

>> muHaghmoH! mujchu' ngoqqoqDaj. 
>
>ghaytan <<ngoq>> Dalo'Ha'pu'. <<De'wI' DaghunHa'pu'>> yIqel.

See above...

>> veSDuj tu'lu'be'bogh leghmoH!
>
><<De'wI' DaghunHa'pu'mo' maHvaD veSDujqoq DaleghmoHlaw'. 
>mInDu'maj toj QapHa'bogh De'wI'>>

*Ah.* jIyaj... qIghmey DIlo'laH. :-)

>> QeHqu' HoD. QaghmeyDajmo', bIghHa'vaD QeDpIn ngeH HoD. 
>
>DIch vIghajbe'. {-vaD} Dalo'Ha'taH 'e' vIpIH. QeDpIn ngeHDI' 
>HoD, bIghHa' QaH pagh. qama' moj QeDpIn. bIghHa' DabchoH QeDpIn 
>'e' raD HoD.

jIyajbe'. :-( HIyajmoH.

>> On the bridge, the science officer was programming the computer quickly. 
>> Suddenly, the tactical officer said that a Romulan warship apparently
>> decloaked right in front of them.
>
>*Indirect quotation* Dalo'pu'. wej mIwvam Del *Okrand*. chaq 
>mIwvam tu'lu' 'ach wej wItu'. DaH *direct quotation* Dalo'nIS.

* ...hence the problem with <'e' jatlh>. I hope I've fixed this now. *

>> The captain asked me for visual. 
>
>mIwvam wISovbe'bough Dalo'qa'pu'.
>
>> I complied, but there was nothing
>> there!
>
>naDev *past tense* Dalo' 'ach DungDaq *perfective* Dalo'. 
>yIqelqa'.

yItuv...: 

* Translation: Here you use the past tense, but above you used
perfective. Take note! * I used {jIHeQta'} above... are you suggesting I
use {jIHeQpu'}? 

[vIpe']

HIQaHqangtaH! jIDub vIneH: QaHraj vIpoQ!
-- 
Matt Johnson <mailto:[email protected]>



Back to archive top level