tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 24 23:05:07 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC Challenge
- From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC Challenge
- Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 00:03:20 -0700
- Importance: Normal
I posted a challenge, and quite a few people responded. I've grouped my
comments and corrections for the whole set.
> qatlh verengan chop targh?
jang K'ryntes:
> romuluSngan chopmo' targh, nujDajvo' HuH 'up teqnIS
> vaj verengan chop targh.
maj. 'ach loQ choSIvmoH. qatlh verengan chopnIS targh? HuH tlhISlaHbe''a'?
nujDaj HuvmoHchu' neH'a'? qatlh verengan wIv? bIjangnISbe'; jISIv neH.
jang Mark Brewer:
> verenganDaj qoghDu' par targh
I'm not sure why you used the <-Daj> here, but the rest is quite good.
telDu' moH rur verengan qoghDu' net Sov.
jang Qermaq:
> romuluSngan Soplu'ta'
verengan Sopqangchugh targh, ghungqu'ba'. Nice use of suffixes, by the way.
<Soplu'ta'> is something that makes perfect sense in Klingon, but is hard to
translate into English without losing meaning.
jang DloraH:
> Duj 'aghbogh HaSta nIH verengan
> Haw'meH Duj lo'bogh 'oH Dujvetlh'e'
jIjangQo' jIH jay'! Haw'meH Dujmey vIqelQo'.
jang Edy:
> ghungqu'mo' targh 'ej Soj QaQ tu'be'
This is good, but you need to put the <-mo'> on both verbs or leave it out
entirely. <ghungqu' targh 'ej Soj QaQ tu'be'> is a sentence in its own
right, and answers the question well. <ghungqu'mo' targh 'ej Soj QaQ
tu'be'mo'> is a sentence fragment which would probably answer the question
just as well, at least in an informal setting. Unlike English, where the
corresponding "because" could apply to both clauses, Klingon needs <-mo'> on
both verbs for this to work.
jang Lawrence:
> verengan chopqangbe' targh. targh luraDbej HoSDo'. net Sov.
majQa'. This one definitely got the biggest laugh, but it also gets a small
correction. Inherently plural nouns like <HoSDo'> (or <ngop> or <cha>) get
treated as grammatically singular, so the prefix on <raD> should be the null
prefix.
pagh
Beginners' Grammarian