tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 13 05:51:36 2008
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: ngoy'
Rich Timpone wrote:
> While ngoy' does fit the concept I am thinking of, I am not sure how
> one would reference the noun form of responsibility. I suspect it
> may not be the same term and may be a variation of ngoy' or a
> different term entirely (more along the lines of veS and Qoj than ta'
> or yoD that I referenced in my previous note). If you have thoughts
> on this as well, I would love to hear them.
Because "responsibility" is an abstract concept, it doesn't exist as a
noun (or verb) in nature. Looking for the "noun form" of
"responsibility" in nature doesn't make sense.
Remember that languages often express some concepts differently. In this
case, Klingon employs {ngoy'} where English uses both a noun
("responsibility") and a verb ("be responsible"). Don't worry that
English uses a noun here; just use the best tools available in Klingon
to get the point across accurately.
The child is my responsibility.
puqvaD jIngoy'.
You have responsibility for your own luggage.
teplIjvaD bIngoy'; latlh tepvaD bIngoy'be'.
--
SuStel
Stardate 8365.5
![[KLI Member]](../../../pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol po'wI']](../../../pics/level3_big.png "[Hol po'wI']"){kind=small}