[89331] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: chIjwI' tIQ bom: 'ay' cha'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robyn Stewart)
Thu Sep 1 11:43:35 2011
Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:35:54 -0700
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: Robyn Stewart <robyn@flyingstart.ca>
In-Reply-To: <BAY166-W63E6BCB5C466F047DF6241AA190@phx.gbl>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
At 04:17 01/09/2011, you wrote:
>jIghItlhpu', jIjatlh:
> > tamtaH bIQ'a', vaj chIch maja',
> > wItamHa'choHmoHtaH.
>
>mujang Qov:
> > It's fine. The -taH may be more than the original implies. Do you
> > like it better than wItamHa'choHmoH maH ?
>
>Either works for me; the original "And we did speak only to break / the
>silence of the sea!" to me implies a sort of generalised aspect that I
>think would be equally well served with or without -taH. So I'll drop
>it and go with maH if you think -taH is too much. maH helps bring the
>focus back onto the crew too, I guess.
They do both work. Now I don't know which one is better. The English
could definitely mean that they jatlhtaH.
>Qov:
> > but I still think you're wrong in thinking that "about" means nuDech.
> > It's a dance instruction to turn.
>
>Ah! I see now what you mean from the Macbeth example - thanks. I was not
>familiar with that usage at all, so now you've pointed it out I agree
>completely.
>
>This, then:
>
>DopvamDaq DIng, DopvetlhDaq DIng
>'ej mI' ram Hegh Sech mIS.
>rItlh DIjbogh veqlargh rur bIQ'a',
>wov 'oH, 'ej SuD, 'ej chIS.
Wow, you've even preserved the ambiguity in "about" -- the Dopmey
make it interpretable as a dance instruction OR nuDech. bImoSchu'!
batlhbItoy'.
- Qov
