tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Aug 19 23:53:45 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New canon? (ENT "Affliction")
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: New canon? (ENT "Affliction")
- Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2005 16:53:30 +1000
- Bcc:
jIja'pu':
>This is the one that interests me the most: it shows how to use {Qeq} "to
>aim". From the sentence in the episode, {'ay'vamDaq nuHmey tIQeq}, it would
>seem that "to aim" is inherently the "causative" sense.
[.....]
>Subject = aimer (a person or a device, not a weapon), direct object = thing
>(weapon) being aimed, noun + {-Daq} = target.
mujang Voragh, ja':
>{Qeq} seems to work just like {bach} "shoot" and {baH} "fire":
Makes sense.
jIja'taH:
>These three seem pretty self-explanatory - although I must say I really
>like
>the use of {wuqHa'} in this sense.
mujang Voragh, ja':
>Me too. In fact, it was this imaginative translation - plus the rarely
>used prefix {tu-} - that made me think of Okrand immediately. Had someone
>else translated the line, s/he would probably have used {qIl} "cancel" from
>TKD.
Yep, that's also what I thought, along with the correct usage of the
imperative prefixes {pe-} and {tI-}: particularly because, in my experience,
using {yI-} where {tI-} is appropriate is one of the more common beginners'
errors.
Savan,
QeS la'
taghwI' pabpo' / Beginners' Grammarian
not nItoj Hemey ngo' juppu' ngo' je
(Old roads and old friends will never deceive you)
- Ubykh Hol vIttlhegh
_________________________________________________________________
Sell your car for $9 on carpoint.com.au
http://www.carpoint.com.au/sellyourcar