[2001] in tlhIngan-Hol
Suffixes (Was: <>vetlh)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sat Nov 13 15:16:49 1993
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: "trI'Qal" <DOBELBOWER%OPUS@cutter.mco.edu>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1993 11:36:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-Vms-To: IN"tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.east.sun.com"
Well, I have a few more weird questions/comments.
First, in response to ~mark:
>Basically, you did a good job trying to translate the jokesd, you were just
>too hard on yourself, picking jokes that simply *cannot* be translated.
>Don't be such a taskmistress next time! :-)
He Qatlh law' Hoch puS 'e' quvmoH law' Hoch quvmoH puS!
(Ew, that is a horrid construction! Hope my meaning was clear... if not, I
will send it in English)
HoD Qanqor's post also brought me to thinking about suffixes in general, and I
came up with a very strange question. As I am starting to memorize some of
the verbs, I am finding a large number of them (such as quvmoH) are just base-
verbs + suffixes. It is much easier to memorize the base verb (if it exists;
granted some don't, such as the 'infamous' "nga'"...) and apply suffixes as
needed. (Yes, this is why I asked that question about suffix order! {{:) )
The problem arises when I want to reverse a verb. For most verbs, such as
"par", -Ha' is used. But there are a few "irregular" verbs (if I may use the
phrase so) that reverse with -be'. Somone posted a list of these before, but
the only verb I remember form that list was "Qoch"/"Qochbe'", "to
disagree"/"to agree." My question is two-fold:
1: Is it possible to use the same rover *twice* in two different places on
the same verb? My instincts (again) say that this is incorrect, and it should
hardly ever be needed, but I have encountered a few times where this was
exactly what I was trying to do. I got around it by re-wording the sentence
entirely.
2: If the answer to <1> is (as I suspect), no, then how do you say something
like "Can't you agree (with me)?" Or "I cannot agree" Or something along
those lines? (This is a lame example, I know, but it is the only blasted -be'
verb I can remember, and I don't have a computerized version of the dictionary
to nice complicated searches with {{:( ) Can you just use -Ha' on those verbs
and use -be' for the latter negation? Example:
choQochbe'laHbe''a'?
"Can't you agree with me?" using 2 -be' suffixes. Improper?
choQochHa'laHbe''a'?
The same, converting the -be' on Qoch to -Ha'. Improper?
choQochbe'laHHa''a'?
"Are you unable to agree with me?" Proper?
How proper/improper is "QochHa'?" If you say that verbs in the dictionary
which have suffixes attached to them are not "rigid" (ie, the attached
suffixes can and SHOULD be seperated from the verb when suffixes of a previos
type are added, such as with my "jIquv'eghmoHpu'"), then why can I replace -
be' with -Ha', and still keep the original meaning?
Sorry if this is really confusing, but to me, there is a VERY distinct
difference between "Qochbe'" and "QochHa'". To me, "QochHa'" means "to
agree," while "Qochbe'" means "to not disagree," ie, neither agreeing nor
disagreeing.
*braces for spam of comments, protests, and what-not*
Okay, let's hear what y'all have to say.
--HoD trI'Qal, tlhvD "lIy So'"
