tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 14 13:05:01 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Peace! (was Re: post)
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Peace! (was Re: post)
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:04:32 CST
- In-reply-to: Your message of Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:01:16 -0500
> > ja' SarrIS:
> >> > You write to a Klingon language list and end the
> >> > message with "Peace"? Do you also write to vegetarian
> >> > lists and end messages with "Meat"?
>
> To set the record straight, in English so everybody understands, this was
> an off-handed remark. I was just making light of a fine person who happened
> to be coming into the list with both barrels flaring, somewhat insensitive
> to the nature of the list, posting repeatedly in English on topics not
> relating to the language, and on top of all that, she has a sig file that,
> in English, says "Peace". It struck me as funny, so I commented on it.
>
DaH jIyaj. IMO, it would have helped to add "That's funny." between
the two remarks, or begin with a "LOL" or end with a ";-)" or something.
It sounded rather aggressive to me the way it is above.
> I was not, as is suggested below, telling her to change her sig. Never in
> that message or in any other communication with her have I suggested to her
> that she change her sig. I wasn't telling her to do anything. I was asking
> a somewhat sarcastic question because it struck me as funny. pItlh.
>
Do'Ha'. You indeed didn't tell her *explicitly*, but I hope you
understand that I for one felt such implications.
> rut tu'HommI'raH luqelqa'taH QIntetlhvam jeSwI'pu'. HeghQo'taH
> qechtlheghvam ramqu'. vIHoHveH nuq vIlo'laH? Qapchu'bogh nuH yIngu'!
>
bIqIDchugh, bIqID 'e' yIngu'chu'.
bISagh 'e' Har vay'. vIngu'chu'be'chugh, 'e' DapIHnIS.
> Sometimes I accidentally start a thread like this and then feel akin to Dr.
> Frankenstein after his monster got loose. I had no idea this could happen.
> Sheesh.
>
qay'be'. rut QumHa' nuv. jIQumHa'pu'. bIQumHa'pu'.
ghaytan jIQumHa'qa'. ghaytan bIQumHa'qa'.
'ach maQumnIStaH.
> > ja' Joel Peter Anderson <[email protected]>:
> >> > Doghqu'! qatlh Hol lo'lu'taH? "roj" vIQumnISchugh vaj mu' "roj"
> >> > vIlo'.
> >>
> > ja' ghunchu'wI':
> >> wejpuH. Hughmaj DaghoDmeH roj Dayuvqu'qanglaw'.
> >>
> > nuqjatlh? roj <yuv> 'Iv?
> > roj chuplu' neH.
>
> DIvI' Hol lo' mu'vam lo'taHvIS. tlhIngan mu' 'oHbe'. tlhIngan lurDech
> 'oHbe'. tlhIngan ghob 'oHbe'.
>
bIlugh 'ach ram. tlhIngan maHbe'. Human maH.
Human lurDech, Human ghob je wIpab.
> qaS neH roj. [I like the ambivalence of that. "Peace merely happens. Peace
> wants to happen." Both of these meanings apply.] Suvbe'lu'chugh 'ej
> ghoHbe'lu'chugh qaS roj 'ach rojvaD ghoHlu'chugh ngab roj. maSuvchugh ghIq
> <roj> bIjatlhchugh chaq bIroj, 'ach marojtaHchugh 'ej <roj> bIjatlhchugh,
> chonuQ 'ej chotIchlaw'mo' bIrojHa'.
>
cha' DIS wIqIp. roj DamuSlaw'. rojHa'meH 'eb Dajonqanglaw'.
> >> > That is silly - we speak to communicate, and not always communicate
> >> > ideas that people agree with.
> >>
> >> DaH bIDoghbej SoH. roj DaneHchugh, qatlh bIQochmeH <roj> Dajatlh?
> >>
> > nuqjatlh?? bIvempu''a'? 'a bIQongtaH'a'? QochmeH <roj> jatlh 'Iv?
> > roj vIchupchugh 'ej lajbe'lu'chugh, lajHa'meH roj vIchup'a'?
>
> bIvaQ. chay' bIvaQtaHvIS bIrojlaH? bIghoHtaH. yItam!
>
nuqjatlh?? qamISqu'moH.
ja' Joel: <<QummeH majatlh. qech DIQum. rut qechvammo' Qoch jatlhwI'
'IjwI' je.>>
jang ghunchu'wI' jatlh: <<qatlh bIQochmeH <roj> Dajatlh?>>
QochmeH <roj> jatlhlu'. not 'e' chup Joel.
jIvaQtaHvIS jIrojlaH. not 'e' vIchup je.
roj chuplu' 'ej lajbe'lu'. DuH ghu'vam 'e' wIchup Joel jIH je.
tuyaj'a'?
> >> lugh SarrIS. roj luHutlhchugh cha' nuv, Qapbe' <roj> jatlhbogh wa'.
> >
> > cha' DoS wIqIp. Qapbe' roj chup wa', 'ach roj chup pagh,
> > not roj luta'. chay' roj ta'lu', not chuplu'chugh?
>
> qaSlaH neH. ghoHbe'chugh Hoch, vaj qaSlaH.
>
bIrqu' rojvam. vIpar. rojbe'lu'.
ghoHlu' net mev neH. 'ej loSlu'.
<<yInejQo' - yIvang>> :) (jatlh Dr. Frank'N'Furter)
> >> roj lughajchugh, 'utbe' mu' -- 'ej jatlhlu'chugh, ghu' 'arghmoH neH.
> >
> > jIQoch. roj wIHutlhchugh, roj vIchupmeH, <roj> vIjatlhlaH.
> > roj wIghajchugh, taHmeH rojvam, <roj> vIjatlhlaH.
>
> roj jatlhlu'pa' maroj. DaH maghoH. ghu'maj Dublu''a'? bIDogh.
>
jIQoch. marojpa' roj vIchupmeH <roj> vIjatlhlaH.
ghIq Dalaj pagh DalajQo'. Dalajchugh, marojchoHlaH.
chaq jIDogh. jISaHbe'.
> >> > If peace is what I wish to communcate, then
> >> > naturally I'll use that word.
> >>
> >> yIqelchu': roj'e' DaneHchugh, chaq mu''e' DalonnIS. mu'vetlh Dajatlh
> >> 'ej Dajatlhqa' 'ej Dajatlhqa'taHqu', bInuQchoH 'ej ghaytan bIrojHa'.
> >
> > Do'Ha'. 'ach motlh qaSbe' wanI' DaDelbogh.
> > motlh <roj> chup vay', nuvvam lubuSHa' latlh pagh lutlho'.
>
> nuqDaq motlh ghu'vam? naDev motlhbe'bej.
>
I'm sorry for reverting to English. You are saying that
all (American?) people become annoyed when, e.g. someone
approaches them with hand stretched out saying "Peace?".
I sincerely doubt that. As I tried to express in Klingon
above, in my experience such offers are either declined
and ignored or acknowledged as a token of good will.
I don't know how many people would, as ghunchu'wI' suggests,
keep asking "Peace?" while being kicked and punched. There
aren't that many Jesuses and Ghandis as far as I can tell.
> > SarrIS made his original comment in English.
>
> As part of a message that included Klingon text, unlike the message I was
> responding to.
>
yeah, but only in Klingon you complained that the person
didn't use Klingon, while it seemed clear that she would
not be able to understand that part of your message, while
she quite obviously (mis)understood the English part.
> There is a difference between ribbing someone about their charming trait
> and telling them to change. I never told her to change. To be honest, I'd
> be disappointed if she changed. Dal pagh jagh net Sov.
>
As I said, it completely escaped me that you were
"ribbing" her.
> > If you'd tell me not to include
> > "aka HomDoq" in my signature, how do you think I'd feel about
> > that?
>
> Of course, that assumes that I told her to change HER sig, which I never
> did. Meanwhile, if I just made fun of your sig, with something like, {*aka*
> vIyajbe'. chay' vImugh? tlhaQ wabvam.} If you then went on a fifty line
> diatribe proclaiming your right to use the "word" aka, then you might fully
> qualify as annoying, fixated and just a half bubble off plumb, not to
> mention thoroughly lacking a sense of humor.
>
I completely agree.
> vuDlIj 'oH. maQoch. qay'be'.
>
wa' DoS wIqIpchoH :)
> qaS neH roj.
>
tugh qaSjaj roj.
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]