tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 22 22:22:45 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: To Have and Have Not (was "qel" yIqel )
From: <[email protected]>
> >DIch vIghajbe', 'ach Dajqu' qechvetlh, 'ej tugh wIqelnIS. {{:-)
>
> The first phrase here raises a red flag for me.
>
> "Have" is one those verbs (like "do" and "make") which so often take on
extra
> duty in a language, but by no means all languages. Do we have canonical
> examples of Klingons "possessing" abstractions, or are all canon uses of
> {ghaj} limited to things one could grasp or hold or take ownership of?
I believe it's on page one of TKD that we see
pIch vIghajbe'
It's not my fault.
We also have, from Power Klingon:
Hov ghajbe'bogh ram rur pegh ghajbe'bogh jaj
A day without secrets is like a night without stars.
SuStel
Stardate 2556.9