[88701] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: nom qetwI'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmIt tI'wI' nuv)
Thu Jan 20 22:24:03 2011
From: "lojmIt tI'wI' nuv" <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A6021A7C29B386@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:21:15 -0500
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 20, 2011, at 4:45 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
> lojmIt tI'wI' nuv:
>> qetchu'wI' vIlegh. qetbejwI' vIlegh. qettaHvIS loD vIleghbogh, SuS rur.
>> vIghro' juSlaHbogh loD'e' vIlegh. mujuSta'bogh loD vIlegh. qettaHvIS
>> loD vIleghbogh, nISwI' tIH rur. tloS qetwI' vIlegh, 'ach tlhoy nom
>> qetmo 'vIleghchu'be'.
>
> "I don't see him clearly because excessively runs fast to an excessive degree."
You suggest a very odd translation bent to make it sound really bad. I suggest that most might come up with something closer to:
"I almost see the runner, but because he runs quickly too much, I imperfectly see him." I see your point about the ambiguity in that the excessiveness may apply to the running independent of the speed of the running, but your suggestion seems to have the same ambiguity.
> nom qetqu'mo', loD vIleghlaHchu'be'.
> Because he's running far too fast, I can't see the man clearly.
"Because he quickly runs a lot, I imperfectly can see the man."
My original was poorly done. It was the end of a long series of suggestions and I was not sufficiently focussed to write well. I got careless.
We could actually get simpler:
nom qetmo' loD vIleghlaHchu'be'.
Or to be more specific:
QetwI' Domo' vIleghlaHchu'be'.
>
> This sounds like you're talking about someone who spends too much time running fast (e.g. someone who runs sprints for 8 hours a day), not someone who is simply running too fast for you to see him.
>
> Okrand writes in HolQeD 8.3:
>
> [{tlhoy}] is used in such sentences as:
>
> tlhoy jISop.
> I eat too much, I eat excessively.
>
> tlhoy bIQong
> you sleep too much, you sleep excessively.
>
> When {tlhoy} is used, it denotes that the action expressed by the
> verb is what is being overly done or done too much. Thus the sentence:
> {tlhoy qagh vISop} "I eat too much gagh, I eat gagh excessively, I
> overeat gagh" expresses the notion that the eating is excessive, not
> that the amount of gagh is. [...] Similarly, {tlhoy yIHmey vIlegh}
> "I see too many tribbles" means "I overly see tribbles" (perhaps this
> could be used if one meant something like "I see tribbles far too
> frequently and in far too many places"). [...]
>
>
>> That last one stretches the grammar by including two adverbials, which
>> probably isn't allowed, though this limits our capacity to express
>> things to a degree I don't like very much.
>>
>> Then again, I don't like that there is no verbal equivalent to {nom}
>> and {QIt}, since that eliminates the use of adjectives applied to nouns
>> referring to the quality of their velocity. There are no fast ships.
>> There are only ships that go quickly.
>
> Why not use {-qu'}:
>
> nom qetqu'mo', loD vIleghlaHchu'be'.
> Because he's running far too fast, I can't see the man clearly.
>
> We have an example of {nom} and {-qu'} used with a verb of motion:
>
> nom yIghoSqu'
> Maximum speed. ST5
>
> and {-qu'} used separately with an action verb:
>
> tIqIpqu' 'ej nom tIqIp
> Hit them hard and hit them fast. TKW
>
>
> --
> Voragh
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>
>
>
>
