tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 09 10:57:03 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC / bep pIl'o'



> ja' pIl'o':
>
> > 'ach jInmolmeywIj law'qu' vISaHchu'meHqu'.

ja' pagh:

> DaH jIyajbe'choH. I don't really know what the <-meH> is doing on <SaH>. I
> suspect you meant:
>
> 'ach jInmolmeywIj law'qu' vISaHchu'.
>
> Or maybe
>
> 'ach jInmolmeywIj law'qu' vISaHchu'meH loQ jIDachnIS.

then this means the [SaH] verb covers the "for" or "about" concepts, as in "care
about" or "concentrate on"? qar'a'?

>
> yIQIj.

I intended to write, "... but, I was concentrating on my many projects". I think
your 2nd sentence conveys the meaning better, though.     qatlho', ghojmoHwI'.

>
> > DaHjaj jIba'  'ej  jIloS.  jIloStaH.
>
> Do'Ha'. nuq DaloS?

chamwI'pu'   vIloSba'pu'. HuchwIj  lupoQ,  vaj DujwIj lutatlh.
         [vaj DujwIj mutatlh]?

>
> > *Alaska-Daq qabqu' lengvaD ghormey.
>
> <lengvaD> is in the wrong place - it should go before the verb - and I don't
> think it really works here. <lengvaD> is something like "for the benefit of
> the journey", which is not what you want. I suspect you meant <lengmeH>.

oops. "surfaces for travelling" - that's what I meant.

> .......If you really meant <ghor>, I think <yav> or <puH> would probably be
> better, and I don't think any of them sound right with a plural.

> So if you were talking about tires (as I think you were), here are two
> possible suggestions:
>
> *Alaska-Daq qabqu' puHDuj rutlh. - Car wheels are very bad in Alaska
> *Alaska-Daq lengmeH qabqu' puHDuj rutlh. - Car wheels are very bad for
> travelling in Alaska.

ghobe'. I was talking about the roads. "Surfaces for traveling in
(through/around) Alaska are really bad."

> You may want to substitute other words for <qabqu'> (e.g. the slang <natlh>)
> and for <leng> (e.g. <chIj>).

[chIj] is navigate. I know where I am trying to go. It's getting the car wheels
to take me there which is the problem. SeH might be better. Is there a verb for
"to pilot"?

>
> > Dachlaw'chugh  *car-swallowing-potholes*,
> > vaj DujwIj tlhopvaD  *Zamboni lengmoHlu'.
>
> <Dachlaw'chugh> makes sense here, but I think <Dachlaw'meH> would make even
> more sense.

I was trying to write: "If there are no car-swallowing potholes then I somebody
drives a Zamboni in front of my car." (an attempt at exaggerative humor)

>
>
> loQ jIyajbe'qa'. DujlIjDaq *Zamboni Dajom'a'? 'e' vIpIHbe'. SoHvaD (HochvaD
> je) He beQmoH *Zamboni, qar'a'?

HIja'. the Zamboni is the thing they drive to smooth the skating ice.

>
>
> > qutlhmeH jolwI' ngevqangtaH'a' vay'?
>
> I suspect you meant <jolwI' qutlh>.

I meant to say "Are you willing to sell a transporter cheaply" (for cheap)
I guess that poor grammer doesn't work in either language. I don't want a cheap
(as in lousy) transporter, I want a transporter for little money.

qatlho'qa'. I hope excerpting the post is allowed, just trying to unclutter
things.
                                                    pIl'o'



Back to archive top level