[671] in tlhIngan-Hol
quick corrections
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sat Apr 24 04:01:44 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: Fri, 23 Apr 93 19:11:27 -0400
Some quick corrections to some recent postings. Again, correction
is not criticism-- in fact, the opposite is so: those who write in
Klingon to the list receive the highest commendation.
tIq QIb writes:
>"SCUBA dive" je "act" jIH.
This would appear to be bad Klingon for "I am SCUBA dive and act". I
think I understand the problem. When you are forced to put in an
English word, as frequently happens, it none-the-less should function
according to proper Klingon grammar. That is, drop the English in,
in quotes, in the place where the missing Klingon word would go, but
otherwise use all the correct affixes, etc. So, I think that what
tIq QIb wanted to say was:
jI"SCUBA dive" 'ej jI"act".
>jangneHpu' 'ach bIjatlhHa'chugh qaHoH!
I cannot find any reasonable parsing of `jangneHpu'`, and I'm really
not clear on what was intended.
By the way, what do people think of using the back-quotes to quote
tlhIngan Hol, as A.APPLEYARD suggests? I'm trying it out for the
first time (Here-to-fore I've used double quotes). I think I like
it. Do people find it easy enough to distinguish from a normal '?
I don't know what kind of fonts people have.
------------------------------------------------------------
Krankor (me) writes:
>ghItlhmey tIqqu' legh 'e' neH 'aj DIwgh.
Wrong. See? I make mistakes too. You don't use 'e' with the verb
neH. Should be:
ghItlhmey tIqqu' legh neH 'aj DIwgh
------------------------------------------------------------
Holtej writes:
>"A.Appleyard": mISvaD vIQoS. not jabbI'Idmeyraj vImISmoHqa'.
Since he's addressing himself to A.Appleyard, one can only conclude
that it should be jabbI'IDmeylIj. I *think* that A.Appleyard is
only one person. {{:-)
>jIyajchu' 'ach wotmeyHey mu'meyvam 'e' vIHar.
Again, you can't just stick two nouns together and think you have a
sentence. I presume that this should've been:
jIyajchu' 'ach wotmeyHey bIH mu'meyvam'e' 'e' vIHar
>chupghach pov vIlaj 'ej "Holtej" vIpongegh, "linguist."
Has to be jIpong'egh; verbs with -'egh use a no-object prefix.
>nuq SuQub?
Opposite problem here. nuq is the object, so it should be:
nuq boQub?
(presuming the question is directed at all of us, and not just
A.Appleyard-- if it were, should be Da- instead of bo-)
------------------------------------------------------------
--Krankor
