tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 23 16:06:31 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: (KLBC) Is this right?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Boozer" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 3:37 PM
Subject: Re: (KLBC) Is this right?
> Quvar:
> > > I do not like it, because it's too easy to make new
> > > words by just adding -taH and -ghach. We know that
> > > {-ghach} cannot be attached to the bare verbstem, but
> > > using {-taH} every time seems a lazy way to avoid
> > > this problem.
>
> Tyler:
> >Yeah, but in this case, {-taH} seems appropriate, since
> >patience is usually a continuous thing.
>
> Voragh:
> I agree with Tyler. {tuvtaHghach} works very well because of the nature
of
> being patient: it's something you do over time.
You both beat me to it. Under the usual circumstances, I have the same
opinion as Quvar:
Overuse of {-ghach} probably indicates that the translator isn't giving
enough thought to a recast for translation, that they're trying to make a
noun out of something that is perfectly workable as a verb. It's an "easy
out". But, as Tyler and Voragh have pointed out, I like it because someone
who isn't *continuously* patient simply isn't patient. It just so happens
that the {-taHghach} ending, so dreadfully common in poor translations, fits
in with the concept of being patient beautifully.
I'll get down off my soapbox now. }}: )
--ngabwI'
tIq. taQ. tlhIngan tlhaq. HovpoH!
http://web.tampabay.rr.com/ngabwi/
HovpoH 700700.2
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol po'wI']](/pics/level3_big.png "[Hol po'wI']"){kind=small}