tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 30 17:55:03 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: was: `dative' / KLBC
jIja'pu':
> ja'chuqDaq Dojbe' tlhIngan Hol jatlhmeH laH.
ja' pIl'o':
> a typo? did you mean to write <ja'chuqDI'>?
ghobe'. lugh mu'wIj. DIp 'oH je <ja'chuq>'e'...
Okay, so I twisted the idea of the ancient Succession Ritual a bit. I
meant that among Trek fans, the ability to speak Klingon doesn't seem to
count for much in the way of bragging rights. Foreheads and baldrics trump
syntax and vocabulary.
jIH:
> laH cha' nav neHlaw'.
pIl'o':
> If the <cha'> is noun, "two", then I don't understand the sentence. If it
>is the
>homonym (is that the right word?) verb form wouldn't it need a verb syntactic
>marker like <-bogh>?
The verb {neH} is special. The pronoun {'e'} isn't used when {neH} is the
second verb of a Sentence As Object construction. Try reading it again,
keeping that in mind.
>loQ jImISlI'. Do you mean two negatives mean a positive, two negatives
>are the
>negative emphasized or two negatives are ungrammatical, therefore forbidden?
A single negative is enough to negate the idea. A second negative tends to
negate the negation, thus saying something close to a positive. There are
languages where a negation idea requires "negative" grammar in multiple
places in a sentence, but Klingon is not one of them.
-- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh