[89497] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'maH vagh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Thu Sep 8 01:27:57 2011
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 15:20:28 +1000
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110907171839.04f2baa8@flyingstart.ca>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
jatlh Qov:
> jatlh HoD, "bIqej jatlh chIjwI'.
jIjang:
> I think you need bIqej 'e' jatlh chIjwI'.
Qov:
> Ah, good catch.Am I even allowed to say it the way you suggest?
That's a good question. Marc's always been pretty evasive on how
indirect quotation works in Klingon, if it even does. Personally
I don't have any problem with it at all: X 'e' jatlh parallels a
pile of other canon patterns. But your recast works fine, anyway.
Qov:
> not qaSpa' DaHjaj tlhIngan vIqIHchugh,
jIH:
> There seems to be a tendency developing in a lot of Klingon
> prose to put the adverb at the start of the entire sentence,
> including any subordinate clauses.
Qov:
> It comes from a paranoid strict reading of TKD on adverbs and
> nouns with other functions. But you're quite right here. I'll
> move it and if anyone objects we can all hash it out.
Sounds like fun.
> I miss BG debates with misinformed beginners. It kept it all
> fresh for me.
For me too. It was a great thing, to be made to constantly think
about why I did things the way I did, and it made my Klingon much
better in the long run.
On that topic, there've been a couple of relatively new learners
surfacing lately; do you (or anyone else) think it'd be worth
resuscitating the BG system/program/thing?
Qov:
> "chaq Daj tlhIngan Satlh mIw."
jIH:
> Hee hee. Dajbej'a' tlhIngan Satlh mIw? vItu'meH jIboH. :)
Qov:
> Do'Ha', Satlh tej SoH 'e' vISovpa' 'ay''a'vetlh vIqonta'.
> tlhIngan Satlh mIw Daj vI'oghnIS. wa' vISov 'ej vInabta', 'ach
> latlhmey Dabajta'.
qay'be'qu'. mIwmey Da'oghbogh vIloSqang. Daj 'e' vIbej!
QeS 'utlh
