tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 10 08:06:17 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Monster verb construction - does this work?

On Wed, 10 Feb 1999 06:17:11 -0800 (PST) Joel Peter Anderson 
<> wrote:

> I don't anticipate ever using this in a sentence (I'm doubt it even
> expresses a coherent thought).  However, as an example, and as a mnemonic
> or chart of all the verb suffixes in action does this work?  And, for that
> matter, can someone suggest a better construction?  (My aim was to have a
> handy word like the noun QaghHommeyHeylIjmo' that uses all of the nominal
> suffixes 1-5): 
>    bIHup'eghnISbe'qa'moHlaHbejtaHneS'a'

"Are you continuously definitely able to resume causing yourself 
to not need to punish, your honor?" Interesting.

Well, I'd personally be tempted to pair it with your favorite 
noun thing and make a sentence, like this Klingon equivalent to 
"How are things going with your wife?" while addressing someone 
who has been complaining lately about marital problems, spoken 
to both members of the marriage:

QaghHommeyHeyrajmo' Sungaghchuqqangqa'moHlaHbe'chu'taHneS'a'?

"Your honors, are you, because of your apparent little errors, 
still perfectly unable to cause each other to again be willing 
to mate?"

Not bad for two words.

> d'Armond's pojwI' didn't blink at this and yielded:

pojwI' never blinks.
>  you (yes/no)? honorific on-going certainly can cause todo again 
> 	not need to oneself punish 
> (Whatever *that* means!)

pojwI' is a great way to quickly look up words. The task of 
interpreting affix combinations is a substantial one, however...
>    joel anderson * *
>  **mIghghachvo' yImej 'ej yIQaQ; roj yInej 'ej Dochvam yItlha'**
>      **Depart from evil, and do good; Seek peace, and pursue it**

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level