tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 30 13:12:51 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: noH Qujmey
- From: Perry Brulotte <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC: noH Qujmey
- Date: Thu, 30 May 2002 13:12:39 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 12:02
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: KLBC: noH Qujmey
>
>
> > I didn't have /rItlh/ or /moQ/ in my Klingon DB. It's there now!
>
> Do you have KGT (Klingon for the Galactic Traveler)?
>
Yes... but obviously I've missed some stuff in the transfer to my database.
>
> > > > tlhIngan noH Quj tuq vIchenmoH vIneH 'ach SuvwI'pu' vItu'nIS.
> > > I might have used Sam instead of tu'.
> >
> > I actually had /Sam/ in there first... I liked the "sound" of /tu'/
> > better. Is there a reason for the difference or is it just
> more of a
> > preference (two words meaning the same thing)??
>
> tu' - discover, observe, notice, find
> Sam - Seek and find, locate
Yeah... I guess if I looked closer. My focus must not be too good today.
Must be these damned people who keep wanting me to do work at work!
/petaQmey!/ (I used the non-speaking version on purpose!)
>
> When a definition has more than one word/phrase, you need to
> take into account
> all the words/phrases. /tu'/ doesn't have a direct english
> translation. /tu'/
> doesn't mean just "find". It doesn't mean just "observe".
> It has a meaning
> all of it's own that is sort of a mixture of all the
> words/phrases. /tu'/ could kind of work, but it has "observe,
> notice" in there. It works good
> enough that if we had this conversation outside of this
> classroom, I wouldn't
> think about it and wouldn't mention it. That's why I didn't
> say it's wrong, I
> just listed what I might have used.
>
>
> > > DloraH, BG ... a paintball god.
> >
> > rItlh moQ Qun??? yotlhDaq wItob vIneH! rItlh moQ Qun jIH!
> chaq rItlh
> > moQ yotlh wIchargchuq! ghap wInID 'ej wIHegh!
>
> When using -chuq, the prefix can not imply an object.
> Is /chaq rItlh moQ yotlh.../ "perhaps we will conquer
> eachother on the pball
> field" or "perhaps we will conquer the pball (together)"?
>
> chaq rItlh moQ yotlhDaq macharghchuq
> or
> chaq rItlh moQ yotlh wIchargh
>
>
chaq rItlh moQ yotlh wIchargh!
> > > (I have a small section on my website,)
> > http://www2.rpa.net/~cheesbro
>
>
> nuH Dalo'bogh yIngu'
> PGP vIlo' ... 'ej jIQap.
>
*PGP* vIlo' 'ej *Tippmann 98/Flatline* vIlo' ... 'ej reH jIQap. cha'
*PGP*mey vIghaj. chu' wa' *PGP* 'ej ngo' wa' *PGP*. 'ej *Sidekick Semi*
vIghaj 'ach vIlo'be'. yotlhDaq *Tippmann 98/Flatline* je chu' *PGP* vIqeng.
*Tippmann 98/Flatline* wa'DIch nuH. *PGP* cha'DIch nuH. 'ach rut wa' nuH,
vaj *PGP* vIlo'. QaQqu' *Flatline* chuq.
[[I'm sure the above is a mess... I'll translate it back for you based on
intent below:]]
***
I use a PGP and a Tippmann 98/Flatline ... And I ALWAYS succeed. I have 2
PGP's. One PGP is new {style} and one PGP is old {style}. And I have a
Sidekick Semi, but I don't use it. On the field I carry the Tippmann
98/Flatline and the new {style} PGP. The Tippmann 98/Flatline is the
primary weapon. The PGP is the backup (secondary) weapon. But sometimes I
carry one weapon, then I use the PGP. The range of the Flatline is very
good.
>
> DloraH
>
>