[91749] in tlhIngan-Hol

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] qo''e' tu'bogh pagh - 'ay' loS

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID jonpIn)
Wed Jan 18 14:50:22 2012

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:50:02 +0100
From: "De'vID jonpIn" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
To: tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org

--===============7654852484963041133==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3040eac6e5d23d04b6d2c0ca

--20cf3040eac6e5d23d04b6d2c0ca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

De'vID:
> > Dor ghu'vam'e' luDIllaHbe'bogh tlhInganpu'.
> > boQDu': *Bill*, 'ejyo' wIpujqu'moH 'e' wIchup'a'?

QeS 'utlh:
> I don't think {wIpujqu'moH} is quite right. They're not talking about
> weakening Starfleet - to me mothballing it implies putting it away more
> or less completely, because it's become obsolete. Actually, what about
> {wInotlhmoH}?

I'm not sure that {notlhmoH} has that meaning. {notlhmoH} sounds like one
is making something obsolete, for example, making the Enterprise A obsolete
by developing a faster/more powerful starship, or making warfare obsolete
by rendering it uneconomical.  As you said, mothballing something means
it's already obsolete, so {notlhmoH} doesn't apply.

Maybe {notlhmo' ...} but I can't think of a word for "store, put in
storage".

De'vID:
> > CARTWRIGHT: jImorghnIS.  DIvI' logh qoDDaq wunHa'choH tlhInganpu' 'e'
> > wIchaw'chugh vaj maHoH'egh.

QeS 'utlh:
> tlhIngan Hol Monopoly wot 'oH'a' {wun}'e'? vIghovbe'qu' jIH.

Yes, it means "be vulnerable, be unprotected" based on the two instances of
where it's used (warning, the two sentences are right below, skip ahead if
you don't want to see them -- I'm including them for context in case you
want to comment on my use of {wunHa'}):

{Dumer DIvI' QaS 'ej DuHIv, vaj bIwunchoH 'ej bIrIQchoH.} "Surprise attack
by Federation leaves you unprotected and damaged."

{DuHIv jagh Dangu'laHbe'bogh, vaj bIwunchoH 'ej bIpujchoH.} "Attack by
unknown enemy leaves you vulnerable and weak."

De'vID:
> > qIbDaq nov veQ lumoj tlhInganpu'. 'ej 'ejyo' wIlaghchugh, yermaj DanDI'
> > mut vaQ[2] maHub'eghlaHbe'.

QeS 'utlh:
> {mut vaQ} is fine, though {vaQ} also has strongly positive connotations
> in slang (see KGT p.67). If you want to avoid that, {ral} "be violent"
> might be a good recast.

{ral} is better.  Done.

De'vID:
> > tormoHmeH 'eb 'oH 'ebvam'e'.  ghIq mab wIqon 'e' wIpoQmeH HoSmaj QaQ
> > law' HoSchaj QaQ puS.[3]

QeS 'utlh:
> This is hard, and I think you've captured the essence of it pretty well.
> {ghIq} should probably go before {HoSmaj QaQ law'...}, but other than that
> it looks okay.

I still think it should be "better than now" rather than "better than
them", but I'll leave it as is until I think of a better way to express
this.

De'vID:
> > DoS'e' qIpbogh *Cartwright* 'aj vIqIp[5] 'e' raDlu'.[6]

QeS 'utlh:
> Again, inventive. Personally I'd steer clear of {'e' X-lu'} though. {net
> X} is perfectly acceptable for this.

Okay, changing to {net raD}.  But what about the {DoS'e' qIpbogh
*Cartwright* 'aj} part?

Thanks again for your comments!

--
De'vID

--20cf3040eac6e5d23d04b6d2c0ca
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<p>De&#39;vID:<br>
&gt; &gt; Dor ghu&#39;vam&#39;e&#39; luDIllaHbe&#39;bogh tlhInganpu&#39;.<b=
r>
&gt; &gt; boQDu&#39;: *Bill*, &#39;ejyo&#39; wIpujqu&#39;moH &#39;e&#39; wI=
chup&#39;a&#39;?</p>
<p>QeS &#39;utlh:<br>
&gt; I don&#39;t think {wIpujqu&#39;moH} is quite right. They&#39;re not ta=
lking about<br>
&gt; weakening Starfleet - to me mothballing it implies putting it away mor=
e<br>
&gt; or less completely, because it&#39;s become obsolete. Actually, what a=
bout<br>
&gt; {wInotlhmoH}?</p>
<p>I&#39;m not sure that {notlhmoH} has that meaning. {notlhmoH} sounds lik=
e one is making something obsolete, for example, making the Enterprise A ob=
solete by developing a faster/more powerful starship, or making warfare obs=
olete by rendering it uneconomical.=A0 As you said, mothballing something m=
eans it&#39;s already obsolete, so {notlhmoH} doesn&#39;t apply.</p>

<p>Maybe {notlhmo&#39; ...} but I can&#39;t think of a word for &quot;store=
, put in storage&quot;.</p>
<p>De&#39;vID:<br>
&gt; &gt; CARTWRIGHT: jImorghnIS. =A0DIvI&#39; logh qoDDaq wunHa&#39;choH t=
lhInganpu&#39; &#39;e&#39;<br>
&gt; &gt; wIchaw&#39;chugh vaj maHoH&#39;egh.</p>
<p>QeS &#39;utlh:<br>
&gt; tlhIngan Hol Monopoly wot &#39;oH&#39;a&#39; {wun}&#39;e&#39;? vIghovb=
e&#39;qu&#39; jIH.</p>
<p>Yes, it means &quot;be vulnerable, be unprotected&quot; based on the two=
 instances of where it&#39;s used (warning, the two sentences are right bel=
ow, skip ahead if you don&#39;t want to see them -- I&#39;m including them =
for context in case you want to comment on my use of {wunHa&#39;}):</p>

<p>{Dumer DIvI&#39; QaS &#39;ej DuHIv, vaj bIwunchoH &#39;ej bIrIQchoH.} &q=
uot;Surprise attack by Federation leaves you unprotected and damaged.&quot;=
</p>
<p>{DuHIv jagh Dangu&#39;laHbe&#39;bogh, vaj bIwunchoH &#39;ej bIpujchoH.} =
&quot;Attack by unknown enemy leaves you vulnerable and weak.&quot;</p>
<p>De&#39;vID:<br>
&gt; &gt; qIbDaq nov veQ lumoj tlhInganpu&#39;. &#39;ej &#39;ejyo&#39; wIla=
ghchugh, yermaj DanDI&#39;<br>
&gt; &gt; mut vaQ[2] maHub&#39;eghlaHbe&#39;.</p>
<p>QeS &#39;utlh:<br>
&gt; {mut vaQ} is fine, though {vaQ} also has strongly positive connotation=
s<br>
&gt; in slang (see KGT p.67). If you want to avoid that, {ral} &quot;be vio=
lent&quot;<br>
&gt; might be a good recast.</p>
<p>{ral} is better.=A0 Done.</p>
<p>De&#39;vID:<br>
&gt; &gt; tormoHmeH &#39;eb &#39;oH &#39;ebvam&#39;e&#39;. =A0ghIq mab wIqo=
n &#39;e&#39; wIpoQmeH HoSmaj QaQ<br>
&gt; &gt; law&#39; HoSchaj QaQ puS.[3]</p>
<p>QeS &#39;utlh:<br>
&gt; This is hard, and I think you&#39;ve captured the essence of it pretty=
 well.<br>
&gt; {ghIq} should probably go before {HoSmaj QaQ law&#39;...}, but other t=
han that<br>
&gt; it looks okay. </p>
<p>I still think it should be &quot;better than now&quot; rather than &quot=
;better than them&quot;, but I&#39;ll leave it as is until I think of a bet=
ter way to express this.</p>
<p>De&#39;vID:<br>
&gt; &gt; DoS&#39;e&#39; qIpbogh *Cartwright* &#39;aj vIqIp[5] &#39;e&#39; =
raDlu&#39;.[6]</p>
<p>QeS &#39;utlh:<br>
&gt; Again, inventive. Personally I&#39;d steer clear of {&#39;e&#39; X-lu&=
#39;} though. {net<br>
&gt; X} is perfectly acceptable for this.</p>
<p>Okay, changing to {net raD}.=A0 But what about the {DoS&#39;e&#39; qIpbo=
gh *Cartwright* &#39;aj} part?</p>
<p>Thanks again for your comments!</p>
<p>--<br>
De&#39;vID</p>

--20cf3040eac6e5d23d04b6d2c0ca--


--===============7654852484963041133==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol

--===============7654852484963041133==--


home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post