[86093] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: {'Iv} and {law'}/{puS}
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark J. Reed)
Sun Jun 28 06:31:37 2009
In-Reply-To: <3453B29D-1257-4C02-8C92-FCC39516DF94@alcaco.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 06:27:18 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@gmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 8:44 PM, ghunchu'wI'<qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
>> I did misplace the {ghap} in the first sentence. pagh goes
>> between, ghap
>> goes at the end.
>
> More precisely, {pagh} goes between *verbs* and {ghap} goes after
> *nouns*.
Well, yes. But the fact that {pagh} is used for verbs (sentences) and
{ghap} for nouns wasn't what I was confused about. I got that part
right :)
> qoH tlha'bogh Dogh law' tlha'bogh qoH Dogh puS, pagh tlha'bogh qoH
> Dogh law' qoH tlha'bogh Dogh puS.
"The followed fool is more foolish than the following fool, or the
following fool is more foolish than the followed fool." OK..
> 'Iv ghaH qoH Dogh'e'?
"Who is the foolish fool?" That question doesn't feel like a choice
between the two alternatives just presented either.
DT> 'Iv Dogh law' latlh Dogh puS: qoH, tlha'bogh qoH ghap?
Pithy and retains the sense of the original. maj.
I also like Doq's idea of asking which is the {qoHna'} instead of
making a {law'}/{puS} with {Dogh}. I mean, it completely sidesteps
the "who is more X" problem that was the whole point of my post :),
but probably for that reason it works very well as a translation.
Plus, it keeps the visible connection (as between "fool" and
"foolish") that is missing between {qoH} and {Dogh}.
--
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@gmail.com>
