tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 18 17:06:57 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Headers. Yet again.
ja' Andrew Strader <[email protected]>:
>jabbI'IDmeyvam ngoQ vIghochlaHbe'.
wa' ngoQ vIghaj jIH: chut chu' 'oHbe'qu' <SuStel chut>qoq'e' 'e' yajchoH
charghwI' vIneH.
>teHba'bogh qechmey maq Hoch 'ej
>teHbe'ba'bogh qechmey maqtaH Hoch 'e' pum latlh.
teHba'be'bogh qech vIbuS jIH. teHchu' 'e' qap charghwI' ('ach teHtaHmeH
le'nIS wa' DIp mojaq, wa' wot Segh je). teHbe' 'e' maqlu' Qublaw'
charghwI', 'ach reH qech maqlu'bogh yajHa'pu' ghaH. pumtaHvIS charghwI',
bachHa'.
>SungachtaHvIS maghojbe' maH.
>nuq'e' bomaqtaH jay'? tlhIngan Hol mu' patlh boqellaHbe' SungachtaHvIS.
tlhIngan Hol mu' patlh vIqellaHbe'bej jIH...<tlhIngan Hol mu' patlh>
vIyajbe'mo'. yIQIj.
>mu'tlheghDaq patlh DIch ghaj Hoch mu',...
DaH qayajbe'choH. jImughlaH neH: "Each word has certainty of rank in a
sentence." Huvbe'chu' qechlIj. vIlaDtaHvIS, chatlh lu'ep mInwIj.
>...'ej Sarqu'be' mu'tlhegh Seghmey, 'ej
>mu'tlhegh HochHom Segh 'agh MO.
qatlh mu'tlhegh Segh DabuSchoH? HelIj vIghoSchu'be'.
>ngachmoHchu'bogh qechmey boSovchugh, vaj
>qechmeyraj Daj law', qech motlh Daj puS. lIngachmoHlaw'taH wa' qech'a' neH
>bobuSHa'pu'bogh. pat naQ, pab ghom ghap 'oH Hol'e'? tlhIngan Hol mu'ghom
>lIHmeH 'ay' yIlaDqa'lI'. "The grammatical sketch is intended to be an outline
>of Klingon grammar, not a complete description." naQbe' pab gherlu'bogh. 'ach
>naQqu' Hol'e'.
loQ jIQoch, 'ach naDev potlhbe' vuDwI'.
>Holpat wIyaj rut 'e' wISachmoHlaH, DuH'a'mey wIloyDI'.
>ngoDHeyvam Damaqlaw' qar'a', charghwI': pab HurDaq 'oHtaH mIS'e' neH. vaj reH
>mapabnIS 'ej maloybe'nIS. vaj pab Hur wIjaHchugh, chaq mamuj. qar'a'?
qen choHlaw'mo' charghwI' DoS, jImIS. pab SevmeH charghwI' tlhoy', roD HeH
QeymoH neHlaw'. 'ach chut chu' lajQo' 'e' maqtaHvIS, chut chu' lo'qu'taH.
>jaS maq
>SuStel: pab Hur wIjaH net chaw'nIS, tlhoS Hol pat naQ 'angtaHmo' pab ghom
>naQbe' gherlu'bogh, 'ej nuDevlaHtaH De' woj chenmoHmeH taghpu'bogh MO.
'ach pab Hur ghoSbe'qu' SuStel, "Header" DIp qeltaHvIS!
rInpa' mu'tlheghlIj, qayajbe'qa'. nuq 'oH <De' woj>'e'?
>SuStel
>DoS vIqIp je. maval Hoch 'ej malugh wIneH Hoch. 'ach pabmey neH 'oHbe' Hol'e'
>'e' wISov. pat naQ yIvuv. nger tIHajQo'.
va, nger 'oHbe' SuStel ngerHey'e'. TKD chut'e' 'oH jay'.
>Hol wIlo'qu'taHvIS ngugh pabmey
>wISovtaH 'ej DIpab, 'ach ngermey DIqellI'meH matlhab.
naDev qatlha'laHbe'. charghwI' Dup vIlaj, 'ej mu'tlhegh vIyajmeH vImugh
'e' vInID je jIH, 'ach Qapbe' Dup. "While we are USING language, at that
time we are knowing it grammars [sic] and we follow them the rules [?], but
in order for us to be in the process of considering theories we are
independent."
I don't apologize for not understanding this. Part of the problem is
grammatical -- the mismatched plural object and singular object prefix is
certainly an error, and the subsequent plural object prefix doesn't do much
to help clarify things. Part of the problem is semantic -- what are you
trying to imply with the {-lI'} suffix, and what does {tlhab} have to do
with anything?
You say in another note that it's a mistake to focus on the words while
ignoring the meaning, but it's very hard to focus on anything except the
words WHEN WE DON'T ALREADY KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN BY THEM. nuq wIyaj
DaneH'a'? HIchuH.
>ghovuSQo'.
Qo' -- Domaj vuSnISbej vay''e'. lI'qu' charghwI', pIj nungaDmoHmo'.
potlhqu' vuDDaj. rut mulmo' 'ej yajHa'mo' numoghmoH, 'ach ghaH vIchoH
vIneHbe' jIH. (chaq rut vuDDaj vIchoHqang, 'ach jImoghtaHvIS jIqejchoHbe'
'e' vInID.)
-- ghunchu'wI'