tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 22 06:11:43 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wejmaH wej: <qama' mIwmey>
- From: "De'vID jonpIn" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wejmaH wej: <qama' mIwmey>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2012 15:11:31 +0100
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=6HRunq0ATUgbAnJhtuxG6E0vEcprIlFHNppLxOOpOyM=; b=jsfDOXiHGbB9UMN/qy7T5wDB9ndcZaEdvklRIEeZxsNj3EWPWZz0jcGoV3qPasnn/7 1QyBtT8NL8Vkxd7od4/AENl6A2hzH5Yamhy93BPP31twmRur6KB3SqUyq+K+VTxuzkLl /DciZotUdvNLPrYXb6oCv3laG5cI38+yS7cUI=
- In-reply-to: <CA+7zAmMv=rvw8ALd+ha0fYOX4-oXb=P1nvkkzPsquVjx-HD+wg@mail.gmail.com>
- List-archive: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/>
- List-id: <tlhingan-hol.stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
- References: <CA+7zAmMv=rvw8ALd+ha0fYOX4-oXb=P1nvkkzPsquVjx-HD+wg@mail.gmail.com>
<p><br>
Quvar:<br>
>>> mInDu'lIj vIvel jIH. bIH vIvelmeH ghopwIj vIlo'.</p>
<p>QeS 'utlh:<br>
>> Given the example of {rav vel tlhIm}, I'd have thought {bIH velmeH} "in order<br>
>> that they [my hands] cover them" would be better.</p>
<p>Quvar:<br>
> I see your point, but it is "I" who am covering it, using my hands; adapting the right prefixes on the example:<br>
> {rav velmeH tlhIm lo'}<br>
> {rav vIvelmeH tlhIm vIlo'}</p>
<p>Wait a minute -- in the sentence {rav velmeH tlhIm lo'}, what's the subject of {vel}? Is it (adding a comma and putting implied nouns in [brackets] to make things more clear):<br>
{tlhIm} - <br>
{rav velmeH [tlhIm], tlhIm lo' [velwI']} <br>
(alternatively, {rav velmeH tlhIm, [tlhIm] lo' [velwI']}); or<br>
{velwI'} -<br>
{rav velmeH [velwI'], tlhIm lo' [velwI']}?</p>
<p>I read MO's message as indicating that the {tlhIm} (or whatever is actually being used to cover something) is always the subject of {vel}. This (I thought) was why he specifically pointed out that one might have expected the {velwI'} to refer to the carpet and not to the carpet layer.</p>
<p>Thus, I'd have expected "I carpet the floor" to be:<br>
{rav velmeH tlhIm vIlo'}</p>
<p>Here's the relevant portion of the message from MO explaining {vel}:<br>
> A carpet or a rug is tlhIm. When you lay a carpet, you don't use the verb mutlh; the appropriate verb is vel ("cover, coat, mask"). One can say rav vel tlhIm ("the carpet covers the floor"). To to say "lay a carpet," one says "use a carpet to cover the floor," or rav velmeH tlhIm lo'. The person who lays the carpet is a velwI' (literally "coverer, coater, masker"). You might think that the velwI' is the carpet itself. That would make sense, but it doesn't work that way. Maltz commented that Klingon rugs are primarily decorative. The idea of a fabric floor covering being thick or soft was just bizarre to him.</p>
<p>--<br>
De'vID</p>
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol