tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 17 22:33:16 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

a couple things

A couple quick replies to a couple things, all conveniently condensed
into one email message.

> >> You can translate {HoDpu''e' pup Qanqor} several ways:
> ja' Krankor:
> >No you can't, it's a nonsense sentence!
> I disagree strongly with *both* of you. :-)  It has a single, clear,
> obvious translation, which actually has nothing to do with what Will wanted
> it to mean:
>   "Krankor kicks the *captains*."
> Putting a noun like that in front of {pup}, even one marked with {-'e'},
> makes it essentially impossible for me to interpret it as a verb of quality.

I stand corrected!  I completely agree with this!  I totally forgot
that pup was also "kick".

> >I've never seen -'e' used that way in my life, and I would assert
> >that there is no sensible translation of that sentence...
> You've been away for far too long, Captain.  While I'm not as comfortable
> as some are with the cavalier use of {-'e'} to turn a topic into a "header
> noun", there is a perfectly canonical example of its use in ST5.  Vixis's
> reply to Klaa's {qIrq vIjeylaHchugh}, from memory:
>   qIbDaq SuvwI''e' SoH Dun law' Hoch Dun puS!
>   "You would be the greatest warrior in the galaxy!"

Well, I stand by my statement-- as I'd never actually *seen* that
written out.  {{:-)  ST5 is a fairly lame source of canonical Klingon;
I'm reminded of the one line with a caption about hostages on Nimbus 3,
where the Klingon contains nothing even remotely sounding like
nImbuS wej.  However I will grant you that this example does appear
to support Will's case.  But the ultra-huge city-eating-size caveat is
that this is being used as part of a law'/puS, and we already know that
law'/puS is very appart from normal Klingon grammar.

Anyway, my main point wasn't that I think Will's example was *wrong*
so much as that I'm *certain* it isn't the kind of safe, solid,
uncontroversial Klingon that beginners should be concerning themselves

As a second point, though, several beginners have commented that they
found Will's clarification post helpful, so I hereby publically retract
all my bellyaching about it (except for that one -'e' example!), and I
further apologize to Will.  Sorry, d00d!

Next, thanks to everyone who wrote in about the stardate stuff.  Shows
you how much I know, I thought vI' was "marksmanship".  I had had a
nagging suspicion I had overlooked something, but was unable to lay my
hands on it.

As a side question, do we have any evidence that Klingons actually even
use the same "star date" system the Fed-heads use?


Back to archive top level