tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 23 15:23:16 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
chutqoq
> > jatlh charghwI':
> > > wej mIwvam lo' matlh. chaq not lo'. latlh mIw lo'ta'. qatlh
> > > mIwvetlh Dapar?
> >
> > moH.
>
> toH. mIw 'IH neH Dalaj. wejpuH. moH butlh 'e' DaHar'a'?
choyajHa'ba'.
HolQeDvaD chutqoqvam qel Qanqor. ghItlhDaj DalaDpu' 'e' vIpIH. chutqoq par
Qanqor 'ej voqbe'. vIpar je jIH 'ej vIvoqbe'.
jatlh:
What we have here is *one* lone sentence with a lot of problems
surrounding it. It breaks everything we think we know. It comes
with no explanation, without even a direct translation. It comes to
us on what really must be considered a 'lesser' source of canon.
Okrand has had plenty of opportunity since this card came out to
repeat this sort of construction, yet this remains our sole example.
We have in the past hesitated to draw definite conclusions from
far stronger data.
'utbe'bej! pIj yajHa'lu' 'e' 'ang Qanqor.
Hochvam DaSovba'taH. pIj DaQoypu'. vIjatlhqa' DaneH'a'? vIneHbe'. 'a
choghel, bIjatlh qatlh Dapar? vaj meqwIj'e' vIQIj: moH 'e' vInoH. latlh
meq DapoQqa''a'?.
jIQoch 'e' Dachaw''a'?
SuStel
Stardate 99895.8