tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 21 23:20:44 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007

DloraH ([email protected])

• From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007
• Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 01:18:44 -0600
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• Thread-index: AcdWMVQ8gKF5x1quRnWG0Mx+e0ioMQAHVmkg

> I have a question on {chenHa'moH}.  It seems to me that what Dilbert
> wants to say is {jIchenHa'moH} "I will become destroyed", but is this
> grammatical?  There seems no example of {chen} without an object.  We
> could say {jIchenHa''eghmoH} "I will destroy my self" or even
> {vIchenHa'moHlu'} "someone will destroy me" but that does not convey
> the same meaning.

First, you chose to express /chenHa'moH/ as "destroy".  We do have a word for "destroy", /Qaw'/.

As for your question...

> There seems no example of {chen} without an object.

/chen/ does not take an object. (I'm sure you ment chenmoH there).
/chenmoH/ does have an object, but I don't see why it MUST have an object.
jIchenmoH "I create".  I don't specify what I create, just that I create in the general sense.  I am
a chenmoHwI', a creator.


> {vIchenHa'moHlu'} "someone will destroy me"

muchenHa'moH vay' - "somebody will 'destroy' me"
vIchenHa'moHlu' - "I will be 'destroyed'"


> {jIchenHa'moH} "I will become destroyed"

vIchenHa'choHmoHlu' - "I will become 'destroyed'"
jIchenHa'moH - "I 'destroy'" (in the general sense)


DloraH

• References:
  • Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007
    • From: pm5 <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007
• Next by Date: Ethnographer on the list
• Previous by thread: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007
• Next by thread: RE: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 10, 2007
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level