tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 08 04:14:57 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Fw: Delivery failure
- From: "Simone Berreiter" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Fw: Delivery failure
- Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:16:50 +0200
User [email protected] not known.
Empfänger [email protected] unbekannt.
Please delete address from your mailing list.
Bitte löschen Sie die E-Mail-Adresse aus Ihrer Adressdatei.
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: <[email protected]>
An: <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 11. Juli 1999 03:51
Betreff: Delivery failure
> Your message has encountered delivery problems
> to local user winkler.
> (Originally addressed to [email protected])
>
> User not known
>
> Your message reads (in part):
>
> Received: from kli.org (205.186.156.5) by service.avicom.de
> (EMWAC SMTPRS 0.81) with SMTP id <[email protected]>;
> Sun, 11 Jul 1999 03:51:54 +0200
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Received: (qmail 29247 invoked from network); 11 Jul 1999 01:51:50 -0000
> Received: from localhost (HELO emlee) (127.0.0.1)
> by localhost with SMTP; 11 Jul 1999 01:51:50 -0000
> Errors-To: [email protected]
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> Originator: [email protected]
> Sender: [email protected]
> Precedence: bulk
> From: [email protected]
> To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
> Subject: TLHINGAN-HOL digest 1228
> X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
> X-Comment: TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsub tlhingan-hol" to [email protected]
>
> TLHINGAN-HOL Digest 1228
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
> 1) Re: tlhIngan Hol vIghojqangchu'!!
> by Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
> 2) Re: Are Terranized Klingon names interchangeable with their Klingon
counterparts?
> by "K'ryntes" <[email protected]>
> 3) Re: Crusade
> by Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
> 4) Re: pab chu'
> by Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
> 5) Re: pab chu'
> by Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
> 6) qep'a'Daq pemI'rupqu'
> by Pillow <[email protected]>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 20:23:07 -0500
> From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: tlhIngan Hol vIghojqangchu'!!
> Message-ID: <l03020900b3ac505a45ea@[216.206.104.153]>
>
> ja' Francesco:
> >nuqneH, juppu'!
>
> tlhIngan Hol jatlh Hoch 'e' vIneH jIH. :-)
>
> bomlIj vIqaw. SIStaH yuQmey SuD, qar'a'? muQubmoH bomvetlh.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 21:47:47 -0400
> From: "K'ryntes" <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Are Terranized Klingon names interchangeable with their
Klingon counterparts?
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
>
> ja' Holtej:
>
> > meqlIj vIyajchu', 'ach ponglIj vIlaDDI' jIyonchu'. tlhIngan pongna'
'oHbe'. ram. 'op
> > pong rurbe' tlhIngan pong. ram.
> >
> > chaq ponglIj vIghovchu'mo' jIyonchu'.
>
> jIyaj. ponglIj DachoHta'chugh, chomISmoH. 'ach DachoHnISbe'. ponglIj
vIparHa'. tlhInganna'
> 'oH. {taghwI'} muper pongwIj 'e' vIHar. muyonmoHbe' pervetlh.
>
>
> > wej maqIHchuqmo' ponglIj vIghovmo' qaghov. ponglIj
> > DachoHchugh qaghovbe'choH.
>
> tugh choghovqa'.
>
> > -- Holtej 'utlh
>
> QInteS
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 23:48:45 -0500
> From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Crusade
> Message-ID: <l03020900b3ac6b85dbc7@[206.150.220.197]>
>
> I've let this sit a while, and I think I'm calm enough to answer it now.
>
> jIja'pu':
> >ghobe'. ratlh 'op poHwIj vaj natlhlu'be'. reHmeH poHwIj vIQorgh neH.
>
> ja' peHruS:
> >Once I deliberately wrote a message misusing Klingon words just as a
beginner
> >might have found them in the dictionary without bothering to "feel" out
their
> >real meanings and usages. It was to show how not to learn Klingon.
>
> It was an impressive job of intentionally wrong word choices. Perhaps in
> another couple of years I'll find it amusing.
>
> >I get
> >the feeling that ghunchu'wI' is seriously misusing {ratlh}, {natlh} and
> >{Qorgh}----and I cannot discern any smiley faces to indicate that
ghunchu'wI'
> >is joking!
>
> I'm not joking. Perhaps they're not perfect words, but I don't see
anything
> wrong with the way I've used them. For a quick explanation of why I chose
> the term {lo'} instead of {natlh}, I think they're quite adequate.
>
> >Furthermore, what is {vaj} doing in a sentence without a
> >dependent clause.
>
> {vaj} is an adverbial, like {nom} or {ghaytan}. It works fine in a
sentence
> with no dependent clauses, as in {vaj Daleghpu''a'} "Then you have seen
it?"
> (Spoken by Kruge to Valkris about the Genesis data, just before he tells
> her {Do'Ha'} and blasts her ship into rubble.)
>
> >I cannot fathom that {vaj} is the noun {warriorship} here.
>
> I do not quite understand your use of the terms "fathom" and
"warriorship".
>
> > I'll not go deeply into the "passive voice" portrayed by affixing {-lu'}
to
> >{natlh} while Klingon does not actually have a passive.
>
> I don't even know what you're referring to here. My sentence is easily
> translated "thus someone/something does not deplete it." Any portrayal
> of "passive voice" is in the mind of the translator, not in the sentence
> itself.
>
> >Okay. {ratlh} means "remain, stay behind."...
>
> Where do you get the "stay behind" meaning? TKD just says "remain". It
> seems appropriate for describing something that is still there, the way
> some of my time is. Are you trying to interpret it in a strictly spatial
> sense? If so, why?
>
> > {natlh}
> >means "expend, use up, deplete." It is a transitive verb, not a
descriptive
>
>
> *** RETURNED MESSAGE TRUNCATED ***
>