tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 01 11:11:34 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Some more clueless questions
ter'eS BG:
>>I never saw your original post(s). Since you are
>>using the tag KLBC, you seem familiar with the idea of
>>the Beginner's Grammarian. I'm supposed to get first
>>crack at your grammar questions, to avoid confusing
>>you, but posts that are exclusively about vocabulary
>>are probably fair game for anyone.
I apologize to the BG for stepping on his toes. I didn't notice the "KLBC"
tag.
> >We have QaD "dry", chIm "empty" and jen "high". Are there Some acceptable
> >(canonical) words for "wet", "full" and "low"?
ter'eS:
>>I don't recall a word that means exactly "full", but
>>{naQ} "be complete, whole" might serve sometimes.
{buy'} "be full, be filled up". Examples:
buy' ngop
The plates are full. KGT
buy'qu' ngop
The plates are very full. KGT
buy'law' ngop
The plates are apparently full. KGT
This is not the same as {naQ} "be full/whole/entire" (e.g. "wait a full
day").
We also have the verbs {teb} "fill", {ghoD} "stuff" and {ngaS} "contain".
> >Does teq "take off, remove" prefer specifically to clothes?
> >Is it substitutable for tuQHa'maH?
>
>>I don't recall a canon example, but I personally would
>>not think so. I would use {teq} for removing a lid
>>from a bottle, for example, or a nacelle from a
>>starship.
Although {teq} has never been used in canon, I agree with ter'eS's
suggestions for using it. We also have the verb {lel} "get out, take out"
- also unused in canon - which might be used for pulling out or extracting
a knife from a sheath, a pistol from a holster, etc.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons