tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 03 18:49:20 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Ten Commandments

> >  > >rut chot mu' lo'lu', 'ej pIj mu' lulo'lu'bogh vIqel.
> >>  is there a "lu(')" too much in "lulo'lu'bogh"?
> >
> >Unspecified subject doing something to them.
> >mu' is being used as plural.  The plural suffix is optional, and
> >the lu-..-lu' tells us it is plural.  (TKD sect 4.2.5)
> aha! can i say "qaleghlu'" if want to remain anonimous? :)

Read that section in TKD again (p38-39).
-lu' requires the third person singular object prefix.
vI-  something is done to me.
Da-  to you
wI-  to us
bo-  to you (pl)
lu-  to them

> >>  not chot SuvwI'. chot mang.
> >>  (a warrior never murders. a soldier does.)
> >
> >'e' DaHarbej'a'?  Do'Ha'.  SoH nIHoH Daw'chu'qu'wI'pu'  chaq 'e' vIchaw'.
> nuq Daw'.
> (what revolution?)

The suffixes attached tell you I used the verb Daw',
"one who really completely revolts"
It was the best I could think of for terrorist.

> nuq DaHar SoH?
> (and what's your opinion about this?)

See what accompanied my signature.

> rap'a' SuvwI' mang je?
> (is a warrior and a soldier the same thing?)
> i think a klingon warrior less dependant on the society than a
> soldier is. (a soldier is always paid, hence the word (at least in
> german the "Sold" is the money that you pay to a soldier), isn't it?)

I agree with this here.  But this doesn't mean  chot mang.

> >DloraH, BG  (mangghom bu' je)
> who else is mangghom bu'?

DloraH, Beginners' Grammarian  (and army sergeant)

For "who" you would have /'Iv/ in there somewhere.

> QeDHom vIt neH.
> (just an attempt to do philosphy.)
> qamawneHbe'.
> (no offense.)

/neH/ isn't a suffix.

DloraH, BG

Back to archive top level