tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 08 16:18:09 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: Worst Case Scenarios

maQ wrote:

If I may add a thought to Quvar and maQ's thread...

>ghItlh Quvar:
>>>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!
>SopmeH joch'a'?
>Is this harmful to eat?

For who to eat?  Remember, you can conjugate a {-meH}'ed verb:

   vISopmeH joch'a' Sojvam?
   Is this food harmful for me to eat (it)?

   vISopmeH joch'a'?
   Is it harmful for me to eat (it)?

Although this sounds a little awkward in English, it's perfectly fine in 

>joch'a' Sojvam?
>Is this food harmful?

Good.  Another way is to make an action verb out of the quality by adding 
{-moH} "cause".  E.g.:

   mujochmoH'a' Sojvam?
   Will this food harm me?

   vISopchugh mujochmoH'a'?
   Will it harm me if I eat it?

There are lots of examples of these pairs.  E.g. to start with the 
B's:  {bergh} "be irritable" vs. {berghmoH} "irritate [someone]"; {boch} 
"shine, be shiny" vs. {bochmoH} "shine [something]"; etc.

Voragh                            "All the meaning is in the context."
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons           (Ilya Kabakov, Russian artist)

Back to archive top level