tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Mar 06 17:26:43 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: use of 'e' in to-be construction
At 06:33 AM 3/6/2004, ngawbI' wrote:
>While this is only my opinion, but I think this is wrong. It "feels" better
>to recast this as two sentences:
>Duj vIQaw'. qech vIqelbogh 'oH.
>"I destroy the ship. It's the idea I'm considering."
>
>That being said,
>
> > QeS lagh:
> > it might be better just to say {Duj vIQaw' 'e' vIqel}
>
>This seems much better. We sidestep the issue entirely, it's easier to
>understand, and it gets the idea across.
I agree both with you and QeS lagh about recasting. However, the sentence
was just intended
as an example. Where I thought about using it is in an attempt to
translate the Gettysburg
Address. I'm stuck on the first sentence : )
DIvI' Hol:
"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this
continent, a new nation, conceived in
Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."
an attempt at tlhIngan Hol:
Soch boq chorghmaH ben puHvamDaq nugh chu' luboghmoH vavpu'ma'.
tlhab puq 'oH nugh'e', 'ej rap Hoch nuv Dibmey 'e' 'oH qech'e' qImbogh
nughvetlh yIn.
and what I think the corresponding DIvI' Hol is:
"seven plus eighty years ago upon this land a new nation was caused to be
born by our fathers.
A nation that is the offspring of freedom, and the rights of all people are
equal is the
idea upon which the life of that nation is focused."
But I have the expectation that {'e' 'oH qech'e'} isn't going to be
supported by Canon.
Dar'Qang
bItaghbe'chugh bIrInbe'ba'