tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 11 16:36:58 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: -di' or -chugh

Steven Boozer wrote:
>>not nab pabchu' may' Qapbogh vay''e', 'ach not may' Qapqu' nabbe'bogh je 

>"As for someone who wins a battle (he) never follows the plan exactly, but 
>someone who doesn't also plan will never really win a battle."

Thank you for your comments. I have been out of the loop for a while, and of 
course it is VERY difficult to keep track of all the new stuff nowadays. You 
pretty much HAVE to have your own dictionary, but I am very grateful for the 
people who have maintained their tlhingan hol web sites. Especially thanks 
to Zrajm's efforts, but I'd also like to give honorable mention to the 
Qummem, who's site is invaluable to me at times. :)

Anyways, the bit of canon you presented me with is certainly helpful. I agree 
that the adverbial "not" makes a good hypotheticalizer. But after some hearty 
efforts, I feel the use of -bogh here makes for a cleaner expression of this 
concept. Every time I go between English and Klingon, I do a lot of shuffling 
to get things sounding natural. After you've shuffled enough, and things fall 
into place, it usually just "clicks", and you know you've got what you 
want... until someone points out your bad grammar, that is. :)

Last thing I wanted to mention -- the "as for" translation of -'e' is 
misguided, because -'e' is only serving to indicate the head noun of the 
relative clause. It would not be translated into English at all in this case.

Back to archive top level