[110759] in tlhIngan-Hol

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] The {-chuqmoH}

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Tue Aug 29 10:25:03 2017

X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 10:24:30 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2c+9DumW3tEmP6ymvBEpQ40T42a61gzgixeXTZzdVLLN5w@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============1247975322232625970==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------6F4699872EFD9482695518B6"
Content-Language: en-US

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------6F4699872EFD9482695518B6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 8/29/2017 10:15 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> SuStel:
>> So what I said is true... when you're dealing with verbs that don't take objects. If the verb does
>> allow an object, then the "doers" of the verb, whether the subject or object, can do the verb to each other.
> Thank you for explaining this; as soon as I read the {Qo'noS tuqmey
> muvchuqmoH qeylIS} I was about to ask about it.
>
> However, reading the canon sentences, I noted something else which
> seems a little strange:
>
> muptaHvIS tay''eghmoH QeHDaj Hoch
> All his rage focused in one blow  (PB)
>
> If I was to translate the original klingon sentence, then I would
> write "while he was striking, all of his anger made itself together".
> But since we have the {tay'}, then shouldn't there be two subjects (at
> least) which would be/made together ?

Let's remove the extraneous material. *tay' QeH*/the anger is together./ 
This is apparently a valid meaning of *tay';* it doesn't require 
multiple subjects that are together. You can think of it as anger 
consisting of multiple parts, which have been gathered into one.

Note that I would never understand *tay' QeH* standing all on its own; 
it's a metaphor that only makes sense in context. Don't take this 
example to mean that Klingons consider anger to consist of multiple 
parts. This is only a metaphor in a poem.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name


--------------6F4699872EFD9482695518B6
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/29/2017 10:15 AM, mayqel qunenoS
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2c+9DumW3tEmP6ymvBEpQ40T42a61gzgixeXTZzdVLLN5w@mail.gmail.com">
      <pre wrap="">SuStel:
</pre>
      <blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
        <pre wrap="">So what I said is true... when you're dealing with verbs that don't take objects. If the verb does
allow an object, then the "doers" of the verb, whether the subject or object, can do the verb to each other.
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre wrap="">Thank you for explaining this; as soon as I read the {Qo'noS tuqmey
muvchuqmoH qeylIS} I was about to ask about it.

However, reading the canon sentences, I noted something else which
seems a little strange:

muptaHvIS tay''eghmoH QeHDaj Hoch
All his rage focused in one blow  (PB)

If I was to translate the original klingon sentence, then I would
write "while he was striking, all of his anger made itself together".
But since we have the {tay'}, then shouldn't there be two subjects (at
least) which would be/made together ?</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p>Let's remove the extraneous material. <b>tay' QeH</b><i> the
        anger is together.</i> This is apparently a valid meaning of <b>tay';</b>
      it doesn't require multiple subjects that are together. You can
      think of it as anger consisting of multiple parts, which have been
      gathered into one.</p>
    <p>Note that I would never understand <b>tay' QeH</b> standing all
      on its own; it's a metaphor that only makes sense in context.
      Don't take this example to mean that Klingons consider anger to
      consist of multiple parts. This is only a metaphor in a poem.<br>
    </p>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------6F4699872EFD9482695518B6--

--===============1247975322232625970==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

--===============1247975322232625970==--

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post