tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 26 14:26:57 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: story

: qaStaHvIS wa'maH vatlh DIS poH, rav legh SuvwI'.
:> Grammatically this is fine, but it makes no sense in the context of
:> the story.

: I just wanted to set a past tense setting for the story.  I was unsure if
: I should use the Type 7 suffixes here.  I thought they might somehow be 
: inappropriate.

You're right.  Type 7 suffixes are unnecessary for the simple past tense.
put {wa'maH vatlh DIS poH} at the beginning of your sentence as a time
stamp if
you mean some (unspecified) time in the 10th century:  

 wa'maH vatlh DIS poH rav legh SuvwI'.
 In the 10th century, a warrior saw a floor. 

Thereafter, Type & suffixes refer to aspectual use in the context of the time
of the story.

 wa'maH vatlh DIS poH wa'logh rav leghpu' SuvwI'.
 Once in the 10th century, a warrior saw (has/had seen) a floor. 
 (i.e. he saw it one specific time)

{qaStaHvIS} is not needed.  Officially, Okrand has used {vatlh DIS poH}
"century" twice in SkyBox card S15 (wherein it was also spelled {vatlh DISpoH}
- though this could be SkyBox's typo, not Okrand's; there is another typo on
the card).

 qItI'nga Duj tera' vatlh DIS poH cha'maH wej HochHom lo'lu'taH 
 the K'Tinga-class remained in use for most of the 23rd century

 tera' vatlh DISpoH cha'maH loS bong QongmeH qItI'nga Duj tI'ang
 ghompu' DIvI' 'ejDo' 'entepray' 
 A sleeper ship of this [K'Tinga] class, the T'Ong, was encountered
 in the 24th century by the USS Enterprise.

Unofficially, another example occurs in the 11/97 "communique" announcing the
opening of Star Trek: The Experience in Las Vegas, which I suspect Okrand
wrote, though it hasn't been confirmed (hasn't anyone asked him about this

 tera' vatlh DIS poH cha'maH loS bIyIn jeSlaHpa' Hoch. 
 Be the first to journey to the 24th century. 

Notice how he specified *Terran* centuries in all three, to refer to human
dates.  Without {tera'} of course the reader would assume we are talking about
Klingon centuries - as you are in your story - if, in fact, Klingons even
measure time in centuries.  Notice also that he used a simple time stamp
without {qaStaHvIS} "while it occurred" which implies, to me at least, that
you're talking about some activity that lasted throughout the whole century. 

 qaStaHvIS wa'maH vatlh DIS poH Qo'noSDaq may' law' SuvtaH tlhIngan SuvwI'pu'.
 During the 10th century, Klingon warriors fought many battles on Kronos.

: <<ghobe'.  porghDu' yInej.
:> Body parts get <-Du'>. Whole bodies get <-mey>.
: I thought porgh was considered a body part.  Could porghDu' imply separated 
: parts of a body? 

Well, the plural of {porgh} is a matter of some debate.  IIRC, Okrand has
actually referred to {porgh} in the plural, or in the singular for that
matter.  pagh's view seems to be the consensus on the List.  However,
"parts of
a body" can only be {porgh 'ay'Du'} - {porgh 'ay'mey} or would imply that the
body parts were "scattered all about", which might be appropriate to a poetic
description of a bloody battlefield with hacked off limbs strewn about.

Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level