tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 08 13:07:24 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: Worst-Case Scenarios

ghItlh Quvar:

>or just {QaH!}

>This is said to more than one person.
>To one person, you say {yIqet}.
Yep...that's how I intended it.  I figured that in most situations where 
you'd tell Klingons to run (a dam bursting, an attack by a Romulan ship on a 
city, etc.) you'd need the plural.  Individual dangers would be more likely 
met with an attack, to my way of thinking.

>And, depending on the situation - when there is no time to think about 
> >prefixes - one can use the clipped Klingon {qet}
Indeed so.  I seem to be having enough trouble with the standard forms I 
don't yet want to try remembering what I can clip and what I shouldn't.

>>Is there a doctor/pilot in the building?
>>qachDaq ghaH'a' 'e' Qel?
>>qachDaq ghaH'a' 'e' 'orwI'?
>{'e'} as a pronoun is only used between sentences. Maybe you wanted to >use 
>it as a suffix: {Qel'e'}.   {qachDaq ghaH'a' Qel'e'}
>"is he in the building, the doctor?"
Yeah...that's what I was trying to say.  I don't know how I messed it up 
that badly.

>This sounds like you know that there is a doctor somewhere, and you'd >like 
>to know if he is in the building or not.
>If you like a more general question, just know if there *is* a doctor, >the 
>well-known construction {tu'lu'} is used:
>   {qachDaq Qel tu'lu''a'}
>   "Is there a doctor in the building?

>A klingon'a answer to this will probably just be {HISlaH} or {ghobe'}, 
> >since that what you asked for. If it's urgent, use an imperative form:
>   {Qel'e' DaH yISam}   "Find the doctor now"
Makes sense to me.

>>I have been seriously wounded.
>leave off the {-pu'}, if you are injured now.
Okay...wasn't sure on that one.

>>Would you please take me to a clean hospital?
>>ropyaH Say'Daq HIlup!
The question is, is there any such thing in Klingon space?  ;-)

>>Is this safe to eat?
>>SopmeH mujochbe'?
>yes/no-questions always end with the type9 suffix {-'a'}
>And verbs describing a quality ("be...") cannot have an object, which >you 
>do here using prefix {mu-}.
>{joch} is "be harmful", now the question comes up, "what is harmful?" 
> >Answer: "the food is."
>Now it's your turn: put it together!
Shortly...I'm just making some quick replies.  I've got to hurry because of 

>>I am sorry--I did not mean to offend you.
>>qamawta' vInehbe'.
>capital H.
>you didn't translate the "sorry"-part.
Purposely.  Truthfully, I don't know how much Klingons apologize--similar to 
thanking others.  But if you think it's a good idea...

>>Do not make me angry.
>This a command to not do something, so you need the same suffix you >have 
>used correctly in "do not injure me":
>   {HIQeHmoHQo'}
Yeah...I keep slipping up on that one.

>>I do not wish to hurt you.
>>qarIQmoH vInehbe'.
>This is "I do not want to injure you", the verb for "hurt (someone)" >is 
Okay.  Dratted synonyms.

>And you have this typo *again*! neH! ;-)
Ouch.  *wince*  You know, though it probably is just my inattention, one of 
my shift keys (and I use the left one almost exclusively) doesn't always 
work.  That might possibly be the source of my capitalization problems.  But 
I doubt it.  I'll watch more carefully.

>>Where is the nearest embassy?
>>Where is the nearest hospital?
>>nuqDaq ghaH 'e' naDev qachvaD 'oSwI'?
>>nuqDaq ghaH 'e' naDev Say'?
>I believe you need to re-read TKD section 6.3. about "To Be sentences".
>I can't explain it all now, but I give you a hint. One of the first 
> >phrases every klingonist learns is the following:
>   {nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'}
>   "where is the bathroom?"
>Memorize it!
>And when you have a similar question, just adapt it.
Yeah.  I seem to have badly misinterpreted that section for some 
inexplicable reason.

>I think you confused yourself with the "hospital"-part. {Say'} is "be 
> >clean", you used it correctly in your sentence above, {ropyaH Say'} 
>"clean infirmary".

>>I don't have a word for "near"
>{Sum} v. "be nearby"
>--> {ropyaH Sum} "nearby infirmary"
*nods*  qatlho'.

>>I translated "embassy" as "building for emissaries".
>Okay, but if it's "for the emissaries", the {-vaD} must stick to >the 
>   {'oSwI'vaD qach}
>You can also make a noun-noun construction, meaning "emissary->building":
>   {'oSwI' qach}
>Or you just look up "embassy" in TKD, and find {rIvSo'}
Mmm-hmm.  Seems like every time I do one of these multi-sentence posts I 
miss a noun somewhere.  I looked and looked for it and never saw it.  Then 
when it was pointed out to me, I looked again and there it was.

>Also consider {Duy} n. "agent, emissary", and {Duy'a'} n. "ambassador"

>>How fast can this ship travel?
>>Do 'ar lo' Duj?
>no, this won't work. I'll leave this open for discussion (if noone 
> >answers, ask again)
>I would suggest   "identify the ships' velocity"
>   {Duj Do yIngu'}
Sounds workable.  That brings up a question I've been meaning to ask.  How 
much can the "more than/less than" idiom be adapted?  Can law' be separately 
used for "more" and puS for "less"?  Can you flip it around?  And so on.

>>How quickly can you leave?
>>ghorgh majaHlaH?
>Correct, if it means "When can we go?"
>1. This "go" means "to proceed along", not "leave" like "I gotta go". >For 
>"leave" use {mej}.
Synonyms again.  I've got to hurry with that word list.

>2. You used the plural-prefix {ma-}
On purpose.  The main uses I could think of for this question involved 
leaving together.

>>You will never make me talk.
>>not qajatlhQo'!
>No. This is "I will never refuse to talk to you"
Looks like the Spanish analogy is messing me up.  I mentioned to someone 
that Spanish verbs have different endings depending on their subjects, and 
now I'm talking in double negatives.  I wasn't sure whether "not" would 
emphasize the refusal or reverse it.

>"make me talk" is "cause me to talk". This suffix is explained in >section 
>4.2.4. (Type 4: Cause)
>But now I'm not sure, because there have been *many* discussions about 
> >wether you can use this suffix in this case or not (please don't 
I won't.


Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.

Back to archive top level