[238] in tlhIngan-Hol
rovers, et. al
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Mon Mar 23 02:21:53 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: krankor@IMA.ISC.COM (Captain Krankor)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 92 01:51:56 -0500
First, let me clarify: I did not mean to imply that -qu' is never used,
but that it is more likely to be used in an augmenting rather than
emphatic fashion. Obviously there's a wide range of latitude for individual
style. My supposition that Klingons prefer vocal emphasis to an added
suffix was speculation, nothing more, based principally on the general
fact that they seem to go for terse, to-the-point conversation.
I completely agree that you can say "HIHoHbe'Qo'", but not around your
teacher. Then again, double-negatives in English have been known to
start grammatical arguments too {{;-).
I think "Make the officer agree" is a *fascinating* example. I presume that
-moH was the desired suffix, not -choH. However, I think we can stay
"in-bounds" with that one by doing this:
yaS yIQochHa'moH
This should be ok, because clearly the change-in-state implied by -Ha'
is valid; the officer currently *disagrees*, elsewise the command would
not be necessary.
Remember, though, that when in doubt, you always have the option to
restructure. We can stay strictly legal on these by doing something
like this:
choHoHbe' 'e' yIta'Qo'!
That certainly gives us "Don't not kill me." Even more elegant would be
choHoHQo' 'e' yIta'Qo' "Don't refuse to kill me."
FTGD,
--Krankor
