tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 12 12:00:22 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: vIl - be ridgy in HolQeD 13:1
- From: "Michael Roney, Jr." <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: vIl - be ridgy in HolQeD 13:1
- Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 14:57:56 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :reply-to:subject:in-reply-to:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; bh=FczSNJbeuEbOL22bDfd/Kd6y9fmhuBVo8FCIFtI4jF4=; b=E1ZSEMAiwoWMxlTMeOcQJz0kwPfzZLffKJM6oxyxk5XixR1q1P00Wh0+9ayIlhCsvL kWbI19twJP0kQRukrVRMjplQ6+38Lc6VfctkN1RqD0J8EtWWTddRt8WKZuo9agTFmiZe V12myzU1rL8xp2ph56cA0TNjWRkcyfZIvNy1s=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:reply-to:subject:in-reply-to:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=YH1xAjHtj6lRvJhnzgkeytJGT7kiLeB4pYmClXHfvXwcg4+QVd7XDYJp0u1NX2fHmO STWTpNk5uG/R4PrBsJ9l8Gy+U2tk0M/qxt8/gObmD7Vg3CSmEOdBBSyJDybGx2mvAF52 /1uNUnNu8YqNh+owodLCF6LKRvhaw5XUI5mUI=
- In-reply-to: <C3A2B3496BC64E2AAB225981986528A6@HPBrownPC>
Yes, it would be odd for Humans to talk about smooth foreheads amongst themselves. It's a forehead.
Klingons may or may not have spoken about forehead quality back in the time of Kahless, but once they met non-Klingons, and *especially* after a large number of them "lost" their foreheads, the topic most certainly would have come up.
On the other hand, Ferengi talk about lobe size a lot. So maybe Klingons have always talked about their foreheads.
~naHQun
-Michael Roney, Jr.
Professional Klingon translator
http://twitter.com/roneyii
--Sent from my Palm Preqe'San (Jon Brown) wrote:
Can anyone tell me if HolQeD 13:1 was also the first time that vIl was
used?
I'd missed vIl at the time 13:1 came out in the sense of I didn't have the
word recorded and only discovered it a few weeks ago when re-reading my
HolQeD. So now I'm wondering if it was given to us anywhere else prior to
that?
Before that I always thought that to a Klingon their ridges are normal and
smooth wasn't so forehead implied ridges.
QuchwIj pIm QuchlIj
Your forehead is different to mine (i.e. different family)
Although thinking about that sentence; can [pIm] be used like that or would
I need to say that differently to get that meaning?
QuchlIj Hab law' vovlI' Quch Hab puS
You forehead is smoother that your fathers
Which I thought also made quite a good insult with ref to parentage
(assuming the grammar is correct).
Whatever the case it's nice to add vIl - be ridgy to my dictionary.but it
would be good to know where it was first used.
qe'San
----- Original Message -----
From: "qe'San (Jon Brown)"
>
> From: "David Trimboli"
>> It was said that there is a canonical example of a comparative sentence
>> using {law'be'} and {puSbe'}. What is it, and where is it found?
>
> See Maltz's Reward Part IV HolQeD 13:1 pg 10:
>
> QuchwIj vIl law' QuchlIj vIl puS
> my forehead is reidgier than your forehead
>
> To diagree with this notion, that is, to assert that your forehead is not
> ridgier than mine (it may be the same), one would use the construction A Q
> law'be' B Q puSbe' (A's Q is not many, B's Q is not few) (-be' not):
>
> QuchlIj vIl law'be' QuchwIj vIl puSbe'
> your forehead isn't ridgier than my forehead
>
> qe'San
>
>
>
>