[130] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: random (but hopefully interesting) question
dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sun Feb 16 19:16:47 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: gt5878b@cad.gatech.edu (Charles Edward Maise)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 92 18:37:40 EST
In-Reply-To: <9201241512.AA00223@podge>; from "dcctdw@Athena.MIT.EDU" at Jan 24
David Cho poses a nifty problem:
> Remember Highlander? How do you translate
> There can only be one!
> ?
> wa' neH tu'lu'laH
> would work, except -lu' and -laH are both Type V, and are explicitly
> forbidden from being used together.
...but I think I've got it. Thanks to STVI and Shakespeare:
taHlaH neH'e'! (One, and only one, can exist!)
Also, I think you used neH incorrectly. It is for trivializing the action,
as in "I only wanted to talk," rather than indicating one thing rather than
other things ("only the officer, not the entire army").
Marc Okrand originally intended for there to be no verb of existance, but
had to change his mind when Nick Meyer wanted Hamlet. What other
circumstances can anyone think of where taH would be used?
To extend David's puzzle a bit more.. what about "(Someone) can see you."
or "(Something) can eat you." ? Once again, -lu and -laH used at once.
I think that the solution to this one is that such statements are equivalent
to "You are visible" or "You are edible." As long as we have words for those
adjectives, we're fine. However, we don't. Anyone have a good translation
for "You are edible?"
Eddie Maise gt5878b@cad.gatech.edu Serving Donuts on Another Planet
