tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 26 06:31:04 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: tlhingan-hol Digest V4 #56
- From: Doq <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: tlhingan-hol Digest V4 #56
- Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 09:30:22 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=Uu+q5R+TZWL41QJNWisAYAd67yURRgk7zxpxBxkrJ66YNb70AfEJlBTc6+ymUJXC; h=Received:Mime-Version:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Subject:Date:To:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
I'm trying to remain concise, since rambling critiques dillute
whatever meaning they have among the excessive verbage. Forgive me
for editing toward that goal. I will try to avoid deleting anything
meaningful or important.
On Feb 26, 2007, at 7:16 AM, Agnieszka Solska wrote:
>
>> From: Doq <[email protected]>
>
>> Enough arguing. Show me how you say, "I have served you for the past
>> year." It is a simple sentence. You have shown me that you have the
>> skill to shoot down my suggestion.
>> Show me that you have skill enough
>> to offer your own.
>
> But I already gave you my translation! Here is the relevant
> fragment of my
> message:
> ---------------------------------------------
> From: "Agnieszka Solska" <[email protected]>
> Subject: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9,
> 2007)
> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 16:02:40 +0000
>
> (...), to indicate
> duration in "I have served you for the past year"
> I would use {qaStaHvIS} (...) and say either
>
> {qaStaHvIS wa' DIS qatoy'taH} or
> {qatoy'taH qaStaHvIS wa' DIS}
That doesn't mean "I have served you for the past year." It means "I
am serving you for a year." Maybe last year. Maybe next year. Maybe
we're in the middle of the year. Maybe it happened a decade ago.
Maybe it will happen a decade from now. I repeat the requested
translation: "I have served you for the past year."
> I'm sure you noticed that fragment since you commented on it:
> ---------------------------------------------
> From: Doq <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February
> 9, 2007)
> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 15:44:57 -0500
>
> Well, there is the small matter of not knowing whether you are
> talking about last year, next year, or a period one year long that
> occurred fifty years ago or will occur fifty years from now. {DIS}
> has no time stamp. It is only a duration.
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Since Klingon has no category of tense, the problem of the time
> reference
> might be resolved by
> 1. context and/or common knowledge of the participants of the exchange
So, show a conversation where that kind of shared knowledge or
context would apply. Show a concrete example instead of a vague,
abstract suggestion.
> 2. adding the point of reference to the statement, as in :
>
> wa'ben qatoy'choH 'ej qaStaHvIS wa' DIS qatoy'taH.
>
> 'ISqu'
That's the kind of awkward work-around I was trying to avoid. If it
really is the best that any expert here can manage, I guess it's what
we are stuck with. Someone should point this out to Okrand. I doubt
he'd be satisfied with it once it came to his notice.
Ask him how to translate "I've served you for the past year," then
give him a year or two to think about it before answering.
Doq