[97440] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Story: ghuv = The Recruit - 51
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robyn Stewart)
Wed Oct 23 10:36:55 2013
From: Robyn Stewart <robyn@flyingstart.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmNVqZagjxSWOT9vB3nw5N4Da2d1zRs03teGxGgYa-Trug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:36:34 -0700
Cc: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============7507453609811635172==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary=Apple-Mail-B2D6A735-D33E-4EF7-A90D-B75D90B1B7F7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
--Apple-Mail-B2D6A735-D33E-4EF7-A90D-B75D90B1B7F7
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The one that trips me up is when complex verbs are reflexive. QeS does it al=
l the time: rIQ'eghmoHlaHbe'mo' or the like. As non native speakers it's har=
d to know what's just our understanding and what's poor Klingon. It's possib=
le, in universe, that the proverb itself would be hard to parse were it not s=
o familiar. I agree that negation is sometimes harder to parse.
In this case:
luSopbe'meH yIHmey boghbejpu' torgh
is worse, I think.=20
On 2013-10-23, at 0:31, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Qov:
> > luSopmeH yIH boghbe'bejpu' torgh. =3D "Torg was definitely not born for
> > tribbles to eat him."
>=20
> I have trouble parsing {-meH} with negation.
>=20
> I initially read that as:
> "Torg was (definitely not born) for tribbles to eat him."
>=20
> It wasn't until I read the translation that I understood you meant:
> "Torg was definitely not (born for tribbles to eat him)."
>=20
> I have the same trouble with {Hoch DaSopbe'chugh bath bIHeghbe'} so I appa=
rently have trouble understanding {-be'} when it negates complex sentences.
>=20
> --=20
> De'vID
--Apple-Mail-B2D6A735-D33E-4EF7-A90D-B75D90B1B7F7
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>The one that trips me up is when complex verbs are reflexive. QeS does it all the time: rIQ'eghmoHlaHbe'mo' or the like. As non native speakers it's hard to know what's just our understanding and what's poor Klingon. It's possible, in universe, that the proverb itself would be hard to parse were it not so familiar. I agree that negation is sometimes harder to parse.</div><div><br></div><div>In this case:</div><div><br></div><div>luSopbe'meH yIHmey boghbejpu' torgh</div><div><br></div><div>is worse, I think. </div><div><br>On 2013-10-23, at 0:31, "De'vID" <<a href="mailto:de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com">de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><p dir="ltr"></p>
<p dir="ltr">Qov:<br>
> luSopmeH yIH boghbe'bejpu' torgh. = "Torg was definitely not born for<br>
> tribbles to eat him."</p>
<p dir="ltr">I have trouble parsing {-meH} with negation. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I initially read that as:<br>
"Torg was (definitely not born) for tribbles to eat him."</p>
<p dir="ltr">It wasn't until I read the translation that I understood you meant:<br>
"Torg was definitely not (born for tribbles to eat him)."</p>
<p dir="ltr">I have the same trouble with {Hoch DaSopbe'chugh bath bIHeghbe'} so I apparently have trouble understanding {-be'} when it negates complex sentences.</p>
<p dir="ltr">-- <br>
De'vID</p>
</div></blockquote></body></html>
--Apple-Mail-B2D6A735-D33E-4EF7-A90D-B75D90B1B7F7--
--===============7507453609811635172==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============7507453609811635172==--
