tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 22 17:18:04 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC - pach puqloD

---B Clawson  wrote:
>
> -- KLBC - pach puqloD
> tlhIngan Hol vIghItlhchu' 'e' vInIDlI'.

Your skills are good, but you have a persistent error that's becoming
a habit: a type seven suffix is not permitted on a verb whose object
is {'e'}.
That means no {... 'e' <verb>taH}, no {...'e' <verb>pu'}, no {... 'e'
<verb>ta'}, and no {... 'e' <verb>lI'}.  Remember this.  rut qawmoHmeH
lI' 'oy'naQ 'e' vItu'.  chaq ngervam vIDajqa'. :)

Also remember that ghItlh refers to the physical act of making marks
and qon to the mental effort of composing.  I'd say {bIghItlhchu'} if
you made no typos and {bIqonchu'} if you made no grammatical errors.

> cha'Hu' qach chu'Daq mavIH'eghchoHta' > qorDu'wI',  wejpuH!

You had already completed beginning to move to the new building
yesterday?  Or you had completed the move?  Or you moved two days ago.
When a verb already has the some sense of change built into it {choH,
vIH, Hegh ...} the {-choH} suffix implies beginning or otherwise
changing the process of change.  Don't add {-choH} to a verb of
change, unless you are really talking about a metachange.

If the action you are referring to was not already completed at the
time of the time stamp, don't use the perfective.

cha'Hu' vItI' - I fixed it two days ago.
cha'Hu' vItI'pu' - I had already fixed it two days ago.
cha'Hu' vItI'choH - I started fixing it two days ago.
cha'Hu' vItI'choHpu' - I had already started fixing it two days ago.

While a family is composed of language capable beings, it is not
itself a langiage capable being.  Use {-wIj} for the possiessive of
nouns designating groups of individuals, unless the noun is simply the
plural of a noun for a single individual.  For example, say {neghwI'}
but {mangghomwIj}.

> > > I refuse to be "perfectly new" (though I 
> > > considered it) because I don't
> > > like chu'chu' as a verb construction.
> 
> > No?  Because of the repetition or the meaning?  
> >{-chu'} doesn't have
> > to imply perfect in a good way.  I often translate it > > as
"utter." 
> > {chu'chu'wI'} is the term I usually use to describe > > an utter
newbie. 
> > The stuttering repetition adds to the image for me. > >  But
{chu'ba'} is
> > fine, if you prefer it.
> 
> Not because of the meaning or the repetition, but 
> because of the sound:
> [chu'chu' tren]  >:)

Grin.  If you balk at sounds reminiscent of English, you're going to
have a lot of avoiding to do.  Mr. Okrand likes his puns.  There are
so many of them that we tend to suspect him of planting things that
only turn up in certain situations, like the time someone in
describing a procedure Judaism dictates be performed on infant boys,
wrote the Klingon for "he needs to cut it."   Think about it.

> tlhIngan Hol mu'tlheghmey Qatlh vImughvIS, 

Remember: never use {-vIS} without {-taH}

> roD jImIS.
 
qaS.  yIyep 'ej yIbuS.

> mughghachmeyvam DanuDqu''a' 
> 'ej bIH DaQIjneS'a'?

I think you were aiming for the meaning "will you please ..."  English
has two meanings of the verb "will." One is for future tense.  If you
were asking if it was true that at some time in the future I would
explain these, then you would be correct to simply write it in the
only Klingon tense.  However, the meaning of "will" in "will you
please?" is "are you willing."  This would call for the verb suffix
{-qang}, if you really were asking yes or no if I'm willing.  But
you're not.  What you're REALLY doing, is requesting that I explain
the damn things.  You're using the English language cultural
requirement that a polite request not be phrased as an order.  Klingon
does not have this requirement.  In fact it has the opposite. 
Circumlocution is rude or suspicious in Klingon.  

tInuDqu' - Really inspect them

is perfectly polite.

tInuDqu'neS - I humbly ask that you please really inspect them.

is about as obsequious as you need ever get in Klingon.  Anything more
and I'm going to suspect you of distracting me with talk so your
friends can stab me in the back.

We now come to the point of {-ghach}.  This isn't explained in TKD,
but it has been explained by Mac Okrand in HolQeD, the world's only
academic journal of the Klingon language.  The suffix {-ghach} comes
out very marked on a bare verb like {mughghach}.  Something like
"translatification."  It's used to make a noun out a verb that already
has a suffix, and the result isn't in my observation a concrete noun. 
{mughlI'ghach} would be "the translation process."  {naDHa'ghach} is
"discommendation."

For "these translations" in this context, try something like
{mu'tlheghmeyvam vImughta'bogh}.
 
> > laH nIv much jabbI'IDvetlh.  
> That data transmision presents a superior ability.  
Nod.  Where "data transmission" is the posting.

> >qaStaHvIS wej jaj 
> > laHlIj DaDubqu''a'?

> While it does
> not yet continue will you continue to improve it?  

{wej} has two meanings.  The one I intended was "three" and experience
makes this unambuguous, because of its placement NOT at the beginning
of the clause, and in front of the noun {jaj}. Never read an
independent word (like jaj) by the meaning of an identical-sounding
suffix.

This says: "Did you greatly improve your ability in three days?"

I was commenting on the differnce in quality of your work when you are
were expressing tour own ideas, as opposed to that initial
translation.  Translating seems to mask people's true ability and make
them do stupid things.

> > qaStaHvIS wej jaj laHlIj DaDubqu''a'.  pIj 
> While it does
> not yet continue, may you continue to improve it.  

No idea why I wrote that twice.  I'll blame my software.

> > Qaghmey Huj lIng po'wI',
> > mughtaHvIS.
> Frequently, those
> who are skilled produce strange mistakes, while 
> they translate.

Or "while translating" -- a smoother translation.

qay'be'. 

> > SoHvaD mu'tlheghmey vInobnISqa'be'.  DaH > > qechlIj'e' tIlo' 'ej
Hol
> > yIlo'.  yIqaD'egh.  bIghaqDI' nughmaj Daje'.  
> I don't need to give you any more sentences.  Now, > use your own
ideas and language.  

"Use your ideas and language" = "use your ideas and your language"

I didn't put the possessive on {Hol}, so say "use your own ideas and
use the language."  Using "your own" (and not just "your") to
translate the emphasis on {qechlIj'e'} is a very sophisticated grasp
of nuance.  majQa'.

> Challenge yourself.  When you contribute, you > > enrich our society.

majQa'.

You've been doing an impressive job of stretching yourself and trying
new constructions, but I don't think I've seen you use {-bogh} yet. 
Read up on that one and try a few sentences.  Or ask questions if
you've been avoiding it because you don't have the whole picture.

nIbej po'wI'pu'.  po'wI' chu' luboQqangbej jatlhwI'.

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

Back to archive top level