tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 09 09:55:32 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: transitive verbs

"William H. Martin" wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 07 Nov 1999 09:25:17 -0800 Ben Gibson
> <[email protected]> wrote:

> > What is it you hope to accomplish by this? Are you trying to
> > frighten me off? Are deliberately being insulting or what?
> > How would you take this same message if the roles were
> > reversed?
> 
> Qu'vam vIta'qa'ta'. loQ bIpuj 'e' vIpIHchoH. <<not HItIch.
> jIle'qu'! chotIchchugh vaj jISaQchoH!>> yIn yISuq.

I have one thanks. I don't need another. And I don't cry, I
bite. Just like you are doing. We are both old warriors, and
after many battles, the IFF needs recalibrating. We have
never fought the same battles, so we don’t know each other
very well. I took you for one of those pompous naked
emperors that seem to populate various newsgroups (and real
life) and you probably took me for another “proselytute” in
the making. (BTW did you ever come up with a tlhIngan Hol
translation for that term?). 

My only goal in my original disagreement was to clear up how
you could tell which verbs are transitive or not, or even if
that had any meaning in ta’ Hol. You questioned my motives,
and I probably took that more severe than I should. I don’t
think I am special, and I am sure you can ask anyone and
they would agree that I ain’t. (If you ask my wife, don’t
tell me her answer.) I think I am all too common.

> ghaytan not DI'vI' Hol mu'meywIj DaSIQnIS. yap'a'?

Well it is a bit over the top in appearance. And you may
want to rethink such a tactic. 

> nIv'a' QInlIj? tlhIngan Hol Dalo'be'taH. tlhIngan Hol
> Daqelbe'taH. 'ach HochvaD bIjatlhtaH. chotIchtaH 'ach
> qatIchlaw'chugh bIQay'. choDoy'moH. yInenchoH.

This is as grown up as I get. But, yeah, I think the message
is important. But I am not trying to convince you to pick it
up or work on it. You would no doubt do a better job. But
your life is yours.

Where did I insult you. I thought I was very careful in what
I said. I asked questions, is this what you want. I asked
those because that is the way it appears.

I took your comments as sarcasm, and/or condescension. Also
that you were accusing me of being pompous. Your final
warning seemed to confirm it. I don’t want your lips
anywhere near my tail, but I thought that is exactly what
you were demanding of me. I thought you wanted me to just
shut up and take your word as God’s own. I never learned
how, and am too old to learn. Nor did I demand an apology.  
> 
> HIbuSHa'. jISaHbe'. bIpotlhba' 'e' DaHarba'. vaj yIpotlhtaH.
> latlh HIvje'Daq 'Iw HIq bIr yIqeng.

Bleeh. And again, I am simply attempting to show you what
your posts look like. 
> 
> qaqaDpu'. qaDwIj DabuSHa'. DatIchlu'meH latlh mu' DabuS.

I am not accepting it. If you want to communicate with me
only in ta’ Hol, that is cool. Actually I found that
practice very useful. But if you want me to translate
mu’meylIj for others, well, pass. I am not a good servant.

> meqwIj Dayaj 'e' vIpIHbe' 'ach meqwIj Dayaj 'e' DaHarlaw'.
> pablIj vIlughmoHlaHbe'chugh, meqwIj DayajHa'taHDI' chay'
> qechmeylIj vIlughmoHlaH? Sar Hap non Hew vIchenmoHQo'.

I don't know your reason for the manner of your response.
And again, I asked. You assumed that I believed I knew the
answer, based on the manner of my reply. 

It boils down to a matter of tactics. We are both used to
rather nasty people. We are both seeing a Qor, and treating
it as Hargh. We are both basing our responses not on what is
written, but by our experiences. All I am trying to say your
tactics did not work. So what do you do when your tactics do
not work?

> meqlIj toy'meH mu'meywIj Dalo'Ha'qangba'. vIt DaSaHbe'. meqlIj
> potlh law' vIt potlh puS.

ghobe'. I care very deeply about the truth. And I think my
reasons are to get the truth out. Perhaps I am not the right
guy. Maybe I will do a bad job. But it is something. It is
what I can do.

Ben (DraQoS)

Back to archive top level