[507] in tlhIngan-Hol
boots
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Apr 1 01:29:35 1993
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Captain Krankor <krankor@codex.prds.cdx.mot.com>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 93 17:30:40 -0500
Regarding mark's comments:
I considered both of the changes you suggest, and left them out for the followi
ng
reasons:
There's a whole thing about whether verbs with -meH can be innately
indefinite subject, which we've had some discussion on here about before.
On this occasion, I decided to go with the built-in indefinite subject
idea, so I made it yItmeH and not yItlu'meH. But my intended meaning was
indeed "in order for someone to walk", with the indefinite subject. Putting
in the lu' is certainly not wrong-- but doesn't scan as well {{:-)
Same thing with the -ta' on chenmoHlu'. My first pass used it, cuz it
expressed my meaning better, but I dropped it for scan reasons, and even
without it it still means the right thing; remember, the lack of an aspect
marker does NOT necessarily mean that the verb is present tense. The -ta'
would definitely make the meaning more explicit and clear, but its lack
does not really damage the sentence.
So all in all, those changes are correct, but non-essential and dropped
for the sake of scanning. If it were conversational prose, for instance, I
would absolutely have used the -ta'.
So now the REAL question: Think we can get Nancy Sinatra to do up a Klingon
recording? {{:-)
--K
