tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 01 13:01:32 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KliFlash [Was: Re: tlhIngan Hol pojwI' 2.0]
- From: david joslyn <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KliFlash [Was: Re: tlhIngan Hol pojwI' 2.0]
- Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 16:00:35 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
On Mon, 31 Jan 2000, William H. Martin wrote:
jatlhpu' qenobIywan:
> If I understand what I read in HolQeD 8:3, then what you need to do is
> add some sort of word that specifies how much time ago. Without that it
> just sounds like you're saying "Ago, he abandoned his post," which just
> doesn't work.
[naDev lujatlhpu'bogh charghwI' qenobIwan je' vIteq]
> And here's how I think it works with an unspecified time period:
>
> poH ngaj (a short period of time)
> ret ngaj (a short time ago)
> pIq ngaj (a short time from now)
>
> or:
>
> poH nI' (a long period of time)
> ret nI' (a long time ago)
> > pIq nI' (a long time from now)
jangpu' charghwI'. jatlh:
> This is an interesting idea. Meanwhile, you are completely
> making this up. I like this better than using {law'} and
> {puS} for this. Maybe it works. Or maybe Klingon culture
> dictates that you give a more precise (even if inaccurate)
> indication of the time. After all, who would walk up to a
> Klingon and say, "Excuse me, but it wasn't two weeks ago.
> It was 15 days ago." The next sound would be that
> accompanying evisceration. You can be inaccurate. Just
> don't be vague.
>
> So IF BEING VAGUE IS OKAY, then what you propose is
> probably fine. Meanwhile, I don't know that being vague is
> okay. I'd say that you are making a good suggestion for a
> human speaking to a human using the Klingon language. I
> wouldn't make the stretch to say that it is something that
> any Klingon would ever say.
jatlhpu' qenobIwan je':
> I would think that you would know whether what you are talking about was
> a long time ago or a short time ago, so this should be sufficient. If
> not, then I would probably just use {-pu'} or maybe {-ta'}. Otherwise I
> think {'op} (an unspecified quantity) would work -- I just don't know
> exactly how to use {'op}.
>
> You only use it when giving a number is not signficant to
> what you wish to say.
DaH cha' DarSeQmeywIj vIchel. vIjatlh:
If we're talking about an event that took place many years ago, why not
attemp to place it within a larger context? Example:
che'(pu')DI' qeyleS.... "When Kahless ruled...."
voDleH ghaH(pu')DI' qeyleS.... "When Kahless was Emperor...."
quljIb