tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 02 12:19:23 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: vIttlhegh bolughmoH! (Soon to be KLBC)
- From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: vIttlhegh bolughmoH! (Soon to be KLBC)
- Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 13:20:32 -0700
jatlh qa'ral:
> vIttlheghmeyvam vISovchoH vIneH. Do'Ha' *tlhIngan
> He'* paq vIHutlh.
Most of us call it <tlhIngan tIgh>, although an argument could be made for
<tlhIngan He>. Note that <He> has not <'>.
> jIbuD 'e' boQubbe'meH tlhIngan Hol
> vIlo'taHvIS vIttlhegh vImughta'. bolughmoH!
maj.
> If the {qIvon} is cold, the blood is hot. [TKW p.174]
> bIrchugh (-DI'?) qIvon tuj 'Iw.
<-chugh>.
> To understand life, endure pain. [TKW p.43]
> yIn DayajmeH 'oy' yISIQ!
maj.
> Don't just aim; hit the target! [TKW p.191]
> yIQeqQo' neH, DoS yIqIp!
maj.
> The used kut'luch is always shiny. [TKW p.103]
> reH boch qutluch lo'lu'taHbogh
TKW has <reH boch qutluch lo'lu'bogh>, and I have to agree that the <-taH>
is not necessary here. You don't have to use the qutluch *continuously* to
keep it shiny; every once in a while should do just fine.
> qen ja' Holtej 'utlh:
>
> > ...The only possibility that comes to mind is KCD. What was
> > the name of the liquor that Gowron used to get information
> > from the bartender, after saying "there are always weapons"?
>
> chay' ja' ghawran? reH nuHmey lutu'lu'?
If Gowron was speaking Klingon (and he likely was not), then it was probably
<reH nuHmey tu'lu'> - Okrand almost always seems to omit the <lu-> prefix
from <lutu'lu'>. Voragh can most likely confirm this.
pagh
Beginners' Grammarian
tlhIngan Hol Mailing List FAQ
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dspeers/klingon/faq.htm