Fw: Delivery failure

["Simone Berreiter" <berreiter@avicom.de>]

User winkler@avicom.de not known.
Empfänger winkler@avicom.de unbekannt.

Please delete address from your mailing list.
Bitte löschen Sie die E-Mail-Adresse aus Ihrer Adressdatei.

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: <postmaster@service.avicom.de>
An: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Cc: <postmaster@service.avicom.de>
Gesendet: Sonntag, 11. Juli 1999 03:51
Betreff: Delivery failure


> Your message has encountered delivery problems
> to local user winkler.
> (Originally addressed to winkler@avicom.de)
>
> 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 <B0000000026@service.avicom.de>;
>  Sun, 11 Jul 1999 03:51:54 +0200
> Message-ID: <B0000000026@service.avicom.de>
> 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: dspeers@bigfoot.com
> Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Originator: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Sender: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Precedence: bulk
> From: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> To: Multiple recipients of list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
> Subject: TLHINGAN-HOL digest 1228
> X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
> X-Comment:  TO UNSUBSCRIBE: email "unsub tlhingan-hol" to listserv@kli.org
>
>     TLHINGAN-HOL Digest 1228
>
> Topics covered in this issue include:
>
>   1) Re: tlhIngan Hol vIghojqangchu'!!
> by Alan Anderson <aranders@netusa1.net>
>   2) Re: Are Terranized Klingon names interchangeable with their Klingon
counterparts?
> by "K'ryntes" <yoshi@surfshop.net>
>   3) Re: Crusade
> by Alan Anderson <aranders@netusa1.net>
>   4) Re: pab chu'
> by Terrence Donnelly <pag000@mail.connect.more.net>
>   5) Re: pab chu'
> by Terrence Donnelly <pag000@mail.connect.more.net>
>   6) qep'a'Daq pemI'rupqu'
> by Pillow <shebeast@gci.net>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 20:23:07 -0500
> From: Alan Anderson <aranders@netusa1.net>
> To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> 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" <yoshi@surfshop.net>
> To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> Subject: Re: Are Terranized Klingon names interchangeable with their
Klingon counterparts?
> Message-ID: <3786A643.349EE908@surfshop.net>
>
> 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 <aranders@netusa1.net>
> To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> 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 ***
>