RE: KLBC: noH Qujmey

[Perry Brulotte <PBrulotte@tlcesmart.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cheesbro@rpa.net [mailto:cheesbro@rpa.net] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 12:02
> To: tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org
> 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
>  
>