[3562] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: KLBC "Parrot"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Mar 3 20:33:32 1994
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@klingon.East.Sun.COM
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@klingon.East.Sun.COM
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@klingon.East.Sun.COM
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@klingon.East.Sun.COM
From: Will Martin <whm2m@uva.pcmail.virginia.edu>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 94 20:22:07 EST
On Mar 2, 9:01am, Al Goodnis wrote:
> Subject: Re: KLBC "Parrot"
...
> => jatlhlaHlaw'bogh Ha'DIbaH 'oH Sajvam'e'.
>
> nuq jatlh? mu'tlheghraj vIyajbe'.
Ummm. {nuqjatlh} is one word. If you wanted to express "What did you
say?" it would have to be {nuq Dajalthpu'}. Yours says, "What does he/she/it
say?"
> I beleive this translates to "This pet is an animal which is seemingly
> able to speak." If I got that right, why is the pronoun 'oH needed here?
>
> Why not; jatlhlaHlaw' Ha'DIbah Sajvam'e'
Well, that says, "This animal's pet can apparently speak." In the
original text, he is using the pronoun in its other function, which is the
verb "to be" [TKD 6.3]. This particular style of using pronouns to connect
two nouns is given by example in at least one of the audio tapes. As much as
I usually preach against the overuse of this, in this particular case, this
is exactly the way it is supposed to be used.
> Qapla'
> -qor
SoHvaD Qapla' je
charghwI'
