[88732] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: targh wambogh tlhIngan
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI' 'utlh)
Wed Feb 2 20:36:18 2011
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110202153857.052e6af8@flyingstart.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 20:28:38 -0500
From: "ghunchu'wI' 'utlh" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Robyn Stewart <robyn@flyingstart.ca> wrote:
> jIbDaj tIq ghermeH choljaH lo'
I've only seen {gher} used referring to things like information, often
in specific contrast with {qon}.
> vengHom juH juStaHvIS, vagh' loD legh.
typo: {vagh}
> chIch qoreQ luleghbe' loDpu'
{chIch leghbe'} is an odd phrase to my ears, but I won't say it's a bad one.
> ngem Ha'DIbaHmey ghoch qoreQ qupqu'taHvIS.
{Qupqu'taHvIS}
> qam 'ej largh.
{Qam}
> lam tun Sujlaw'pu' targh namwechDu'.
{luSujlaw'pu'}, unless you want to imply plural dirt.
> HuDHom ghIrpu' targh. HuDHomvetlh ghIr qoreQ.
(I never considered {ghIr} to be transitive. I can't explain why.)
> qamqu' QoreQ.
{Qamqu'}
> DeSDajDaq SoQchoH targh nuj
It might be clearer to say {QoreQ DeSDaq}.
> ngemvaD jatlh qoreQ, <i>DaHjaj targh vIHoHta'.</i>
maj. vaQ mu'meylIj. reH yabwIjDaq cha'chu'.
I am still impressed at how expressive Klingon can be when it is
wielded properly.
-- ghunchu'wI'
