tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 11 16:36:58 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -di' or -chugh
- From: Andrew Strader <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: -di' or -chugh
- Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:36:57 +0000
- Organization: Decode
Steven Boozer wrote:
>>not nab pabchu' may' Qapbogh vay''e', 'ach not may' Qapqu' nabbe'bogh je
>vay'.
>"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.