tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 23 15:06:57 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

RE: reH Su'ba'pa' quS yInuD. / KLBC



jatlh pIl'o':

>>> HIq  vIjabtaHvIS  yopwaHHom  runqu'  vItuQtaH.

jIjang. jIjatlh:
>> <run> is described as "be short (in stature)", so it apply to people,
>> animals, most likely trees and buildings, but probably not things like
>> pants.

> How about < yopwaHHom tIqHa'>? (although my teenie yopwaHHom really 
> needs the -qu'.....)

<tIqHa'qu'> would probably work just fine. I don't know if putting both
<-Ha'> and <-qu'> on an adjectival verb is allowed (we don't have any
examples that I know of), but it doesn't seem like a problem.

>>> quSDaq  HIq  Humqu'  lIchchoHlu'pu'  'e'  vISovbe'.

>> lIchlu'lI''a' qaStaHvIS wanI' DaDelbogh? If not, then it's probably
better
>> to say just <lIchlu'pu'>. The <-choH> means that the <HIq Humqu'> had
>> *begun* to pour, and implies that it may well be still pouring.

> I believe the spill was deliberate, as that was my chair.  I soon 
> discovered that the petaQpu' at that table had no semblance of 
> honor but did have a very poor sense of what is funny. I don't 
> know which one of them did it, but it was deliberate.
>    is this better?:         
> quSDaq HIq Humqu' lIchlu'lI' 'e' vISovbe'.

This is better. The important question, though, is whether the stuff was
still pouring out when you sat down. Did you sit in a puddle of the stuff,
or did it pour down your back? If it's the former, then use <lIchlu'pu'>,
but if it's the latter, use <lIchlu'lI'>.

'ej petaQpu'vetlh DaHoHnISba'qu'. batlhHa' vangmo' chaH yIntaH 'e'
luqotlhbe'chu'.

Note: <qotlh> - "deserve, warrant", and NOT <qotlh> - "tickle". I think this
meaning comes from Power Klingon.

>>> pay'  vIHotchoHchu'.  'uptaH  ghu'.   jIQeH.   jImogh.

>> va.

> what is <va>? where can I find it in the books?

It is a general invective. I suspect it is one of the milder ones (by
Klingon standards). TKD appendix, page 178.

>>> DIrwIjvo'  Qopchu'meH  pughHom  Hum  'ej vIloSnISta'.

>> I assume you meant <'e' vIloSnIS>. Also, the <-ta'> doesn't make 
>> sense, unless you meant <-ba'>.

> I didn't know 'e' works with the verb "wait". I thought it was 
> only for verbs of observing or knowing. I'm confused. I used 
> -ta' because I wanted to say that I had accomplished waiting 
> for it to wear off. But your way sounds better, I wish I'd 
> thought of it.

<'e'> can be used with any verb that can take an event or phenomenon or
condition or anything else represented by a sentence as its object. <loS> is
"wait (for)", and one can certainly wait for an event. Examples of <loS>:

qaloS - I wait for you
lupwI' vIloS - I am waiting for the bus
wanI' veb vIloS - I am waiting for whatever is next
jIghung 'e' vIloS - I am waiting until I am hungry
bIpaw 'e' vIloS - I am waiting for you to arrive
chojang 'e' vIloS - I await your answer


pagh
Beginners' Grammarian

tlhIngan Hol Mailing List FAQ
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dspeers/klingon/faq.htm


Back to archive top level