tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 11 15:00:26 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: HovqIj jun Hov wov
ja' ghunchu'wI':
> ja' HovqIj:
> >...<qawHaqqoq> describes the
> >function of a film. In contrast to that, your <mep beQ> describes its
> >appearance.
>
> The word "film" doesn't say anything about its function either. :)
I never said it did. But my Klingon "translation" does.
> I wasn't suggesting that {mep beQ} would be sufficient by itself. Some
> description of function is still appropriate:
>
> {DoSvo' 'otlh jon janvam. mep beQDaq 'otlh qon}.
jIQochbe'
>
>
> >> What's wrong with {cha'wI'}? "Thing which displays {a picture}" sounds
> >> pretty close to what you want. :-) If you think it might be confused
> >> with {jIH} "monitor" or {HotlhwI'} "scanner, projector", then you might
> >> try {cha'bogh nav}.
> >
> >Hmmm... but isn't a picture rather the thing displayed and less the
> >thing that displays?
>
> I consider a "photograph" to be the paper which displays the image, so
> {cha'wI'} is exactly the idea I'm looking for.
Yes, okay. It's fine for "photograph". But a camera itself doesn't make the
photographs. It just records pictures. The photographs must be developed from
the picture data on the film. (Am I getting nitpicky???)
>
>
> ><cha'bogh nav> is interesting. I think it should have an object since
> ><cha'> seems to be transitive only, but I'll keep it in mind.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "transitive only" -- any transitive verb
> can be used with an unstated object, like {Sop} or {laD}. The bottom
> of TKD page 33 talks about this sort of usage.
I've heard "He's eating" or "I'm reading" and similar sentences, but I've
never heard "It's displaying". Maybe it's just because my ears aren't used to
it, but it still sounds strange.
HovqIj