tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 25 12:13:59 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Using object prefixes with "intransitive" verbs

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

From: "Heather Myers" <[email protected]>

> jatlh Senara:
> >... wa'ben jInej 'e' vItagh, 'ach naDev vumbe'bogh nuvpu' tu'lu'mo',
> Qu' >chu' vISam 'e' muQatlhqu'.
>
> From my point of view, <muQatlh> means 'He/She/It is difficult me',
> which doesn't make much sense.  The word <Qatlh> doesn't include a
> prepositional meaning,  like 'to' or 'for'.  <loS>, wait (for), does,
> but it's one of an extreme few, so far as I know.

You're right, but say rather that the Klingon meaning includes the English
preposition.  There's nothing special about the word /loS/ from a Klingon
point of view.  Where in Klingon you /loS/ a thing, in English you "wait
FOR" a thing.  English is the language with prepositions.

> I understand that
> what was probably meant was 'It is difficult for me', but this needs to
> be written a different way in Klingon.  (Please correct me if I'm wrong,
> BG et al.)  <jIH'e', Qatlh (ghu'vam)> or even perhaps <jIHvaD Qatlh>
> would come closer.

The first one seems disconnected.  "I'm the topic; it is difficult."  The
second one seems to work, along the same lines as /Qu'vaD lI'/ "It is useful
for the mission."

Alternatively, drop the first-person angle altogether.  If I say something I
do is difficult, it will really only mean that it is difficult for me.

Qu' chu' vISamnIS.  Qatlh.
I need to find a new task.  It is difficult.

If asked /Qatlh nuq?/, one could reply:

Qatlh Qu' chu' SammeH mIw.
The new-job-finding process is difficult.

SuStel
Stardate 4232.1

Back to archive top level