tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 12 11:35:52 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: mu'meywIj tetlh
- From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: mu'meywIj tetlh
- Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 12:29:31 -0700
lab K'ryntes:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> In a message dated 1/11/1999 2:32:09 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
>> [email protected] writes:
>>
>> << paq chu' wIHevDI' 'e' vISovbe'. >>
This one doesn't work because <'e'> is a stand in for the previous sentence,
and you don't have a complete sentence - just a <-DI'> clause.
>> I think I understand what you are trying to convey here. I had to do
>> a doubel-take, though, because I did not find a head noun for {wIHevDI'},
>> then there was the pronoun {'e'}. Do you mean {paq chu' wIHevbogh poH
>> vISovbe'},
This doesn't quite work either. <paq chu' wIHevbogh poH> is "the time of the
book we recieved", but that doesn't mean "the time we received the book".
The <poH> is associated with the <paq>, and has nothing to do with <Hev>.
What is the "time of a book"? Is it the publication date? Is it the time it
takes to read?
> This is probably close. I was trying to say, "I don't know when we
> will receive the new book."
>> or maybe {paq chu' wIHev 'e' vISovbe'} (more likely?)?
> No, because we know we're getting a new book eventually. We don't
> know when.
> How 'bout this....
> paq chu' wIHevDI' vISovbe'. if I just drop the 'e'?
Not quite. You are saying "When we recieve the book ... I will not know
<something>". This sentence gives us no clue as to what that <something> is.
Anyone hearing the sentence in context would assume the <something> was the
topic of the *previous* sentence.
This is an instance where you can seriously bend your mind looking for a
good way to warp this into one hideously complex Klingon sentence. Or you
can just break it into two simple Klingon sentences:
tugh paq chu' wIHev. poHna' vISovbe'.
pagh
Beginners' Grammarian