tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 17 13:39:27 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: headless {-bogh}?

Lieven Litaer ([email protected])

• From: "Lieven Litaer" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: headless {-bogh}?
• Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 22:38:41 +0100 (MET)
• References: <[email protected]>

> The problem is that we don't know how this recording might have
> been used in the Language Lab.  Perhaps the computer repeats to
> you the thing that you just said, and concatenates Okrand's
> recording to it.  

Interesting possibility, but the program came out differently.
Do you have the KLala?
Usually it says something like "no, that's wrong" or so (these files are
also on the cd)

> For example, if I said "Blah blah", and the
> computer didn't recognize this as Klingon, it might play
> back my words followed by Okrand's: <"Blah blah" Dajatlhbogh
> vIyajlaHbe'> 'I can't understand your "Blah blah".'

Nope. Indirect speech doesn't work like this.
IIRC, the object of jatlh is either a speech or a language:
   {Hol Dajatlhbogh vIyajlaHbe'}
   "I can't understand the language you speak"

The other thing needs to be rephrased like this:
  {"Blah blah" bIjatlh. qayajlaHbe'.}
  "You say blahblah. I can't understand you"

Quvar.




-- 
+++ NEU bei GMX und erstmalig in Deutschland: TÜV-geprüfter Virenschutz +++
100% Virenerkennung nach Wildlist. Infos: http://www.gmx.net/virenschutz

• References:
  • Re: headless {-bogh}?
    • From: "De'vID jonwI'" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: -Daq on numbers?
• Next by Date: Re: -Daq on numbers?
• Previous by thread: Re: headless {-bogh}?
• Next by thread: prefix trick
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level