[89421] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'maH wej
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Mon Sep 5 05:03:26 2011
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 18:55:34 +1000
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110903082754.06eedd88@flyingstart.ca>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
jIghItlhpu':
> My first thought was that it should be pepmoH,
mujang Qov:
> I think that every time I use pep in either sense. I believe it was
> one of the first verbs with this problem that I used as a beginner,
> and I still remember Seqram (miss you, Seqram, hope everything's
> okay) telling me that if we didn't know, I had the freedom to use it
> either way.
Absolutely fair enough. Everyone's got to work out some way of assigning
meaning to those words. Like you say, taking the absolutely safe path
means not being able to use them at all.
ghItlhpu' Qov:
> "ghobe'. ghu'wIj DayajmeH wanI'meyvam qaja' neH." QeDpIn qab bej HoD.
> "DayajlaH'a'? bIHegh 'e' DaHar, ghIq bIHeghbe', a ratlh pagh.
jIjang:
> It's not quite clear to me what you mean when you say {ratlh pagh}
> here. Nothing of what remains?
muQIj Qov:
> I intended merely "nothing remains."
I got that; it just doesn't make sense to me in the context, is all.
> Would "jIHvaD ratlh pagh" be clearer?
Hm. Do you mean it's like he has no purpose, no reason for living?
Qov:
> Soj nob. choQ lamDaq jIQottaHmo'
jIH:
> Assuming they're still on a spaceship, a dirt floor sounds odd. yav or
> rav might be better here.
Qov:
> lam is also a verb.
HIvqa' veqlargh! Got it.
> "the dirty deck." Is there something about choQ that makes that harder
> to interpret?
Nope, not really. I think because of the Qot, I was expecting "on the
floor" or "on the ground", and I've seen lam misused for yav before. But
then, I should've realised you'd know better. :S
QeS 'utlh
