tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 11 15:13:05 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC Intro: Part two

On Wed, 10 Nov 1999 23:11:34 EST [email protected] wrote:

> I had sent two previous questions to the list, and had not seen them, or any 
> response to them. Perhaps they were lost in the changeover from digest mode 
> to the list proper. I will repeat them here, as I still need/want responses 
> to them.
 
pagh has already answered this, but you apparently missed 
it, so because you say you didn't get a response last time, I'll 
make sure you get at least one. Being a former BG and all...
 
> wa'DIch:
> nuqDaq De'vam tu'lu'  ?  neH yuQmeH SeghmeH 'ej  lo'taH 'a' ?

Your first sentence is right. "Where is this information?" 
Literally "Where does one find this information?"

You could use a little help with the use of {neH} in the second 
sentence, however. It is meaningless where you've placed 
it. Also, the nouns {yuQ} and {Segh} NEVER wear the verb suffix 
{-meH}, so they are meaningless. You follow these meaningless 
words with {'ej}, but since we don't have a sentence yet, that 
doesn't mean anything. Then you have detached the interrogative 
verb suffix {-'a'} as if it were a word all by itself. This 
leaves us with one meaningful word: {lo'taH}. "He continuously 
uses it." I don't understand any of this.

> (I think I have that right...I want to know where the rules governing usage 
> of the -ngan (inhabitant of) suffix are located, and if it is used only with 
> planets to describe races.)
 
nuqDaq mu' <<ngan>> lo'meH mIw Dellu'? nuvpu' Segh Dellu'meH mu' 
<<ngan>> lo'lu'. latlh Dellu'meH lo'lu''a'?

That's my guess for how to say what you meant to say. It's not 
easy, so I don't blame you for not doing it well, but given how 
much you've done right everywhere else, it is remarkable how 
many illegal and strange things you packed into that one 
sentence when you tried it. It's like you really do know better. 
You just stumbled somewhere and tossed out everything you knew 
and started putting verb suffixes on nouns, forgot that {neH} 
used as the adverb meaning "only" has to FOLLOW what it modifies 
and generally crashed even before you got to the crux of the 
problem, which was building a fairly complex sentence or 
two heavily dependent upon a couple purpose clauses.

I'm not saying that my attempt is the best available, or even 
that I'm positive everyone would understand it, but I feel 
confident that it breaks fewer rules.

> cha'DIch:
> tera'ngan vIttlhegh tIQ 'e' vImugh vInIDtaH. jImughchu' ' e' choja' vIneH.

You have misplaced the pronoun {'e'}. You want it between 
{vImugh} and {vInIDtaH}. You also don't want any Type 7 suffix 
on a verb following {'e'}. That's one of Okrand's great "gotcha" 
rules many of us hate, but we generally abide by it. Drop {-taH} 
from {vInIDtaH}. You don't really need it, anyway. The sentence 
works just fine without it.

Your second sentence would be perfect if Klingon ever has 
indirect quotation. Unfortunately, I don't remember ever seeing 

this in any usage. More typically, you'd use direct quotation, 
so you'd drop the {'e'} before {choja'} and you'd change 
{jImughchu'} to {bImughchu'}, since you want to hear us say "You 
speak clearly." You don't want to hear us say, "I speak clearly."
 
> " jIQIj 'e' DaneHchugh vaj not bIyajchu' . "

You don't need {'e'} with {neH}. I know what you are trying to 
say here, but my gut says that this doesn't fully carry the 
meaning. I don't know a concise way to say this in Klingon.

tIq Dab qechvam. yab Dabbe' qechvam, vaj SoHvaD qechvam 
vIQIjlaHbe'.
 
> The ancient Terran proverb is "If I have to explain, you would not 
> understand." The translation seems that it would not be quite literal, rather 
> implying that if you need me to explain it for you, then you will never 
> really understand it.

I believe that the English points to its meaning so indirectly 
as to be idiomatic, so my first step in trying to convey this 
meaning is to completely abandon the English approach. I take 
the idea and try to use Klingon tools to express it.
 
> juDmoS

charghwI'

Back to archive top level