[tlhIngan Hol] [KLBC] Can you use several adjective-verbs for the same noun?

Fri Sep 30 17:25:08 PDT 2016

mughwI':

You have indeed surpassed my understanding of the nuances of Klingon
writing. I understand your questions, but I believe that an advanced
speaker (I am only intermediate/conversational) would have more opinions
re: the particular inflections you are asking about. I find myself more
capable as a speaker of Klingon, rather than as a writer; in which sense
other, verbal cues could do this work.

If in the future you have a question that you think is of basic or
beginners' relevance, then please continue to use the KLBC tag. Otherwise,
as you say, feel free not to do so so that no one feels obligated to wait.
As we've all said, your Klingon capabilities are marvelous given that you
have just begun! Keep it up! Qapla'!

--

Socialist Alternative <http://www.socialistalternative.org/>
Klingon Language Institute <http://www.kli.org/>

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 4:46 AM, Aurélie Demonchaux <
demonchaux.aurelie at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks all for your reply! (Hoch tujangta’mo’ qatlho’!)
>
>
> *@**Quvar valer 'utlh*
>
>> Savan!
>>
>> Your message marked as KLBC is directed to one person only, so it may be
>> more correct to say {qavan}, but that's really nitpicking ;-)
>
> jIyaj, Dochmey mach jISaH je!
>
>
>
>> What I actually wanted to say is that you speak so much Klingon already,
>> that you are not a true "beginner".
>
> qatlho’ :) ’ach Dochmey law’ tu’lu’ ’e’ wej vIghojta’.
>
>
>
>> PS: if possible, deactivate autoformatting for apostrophes.
>
> qaghwI' vIvevmo’, DaH <Alt + 0146> vIlo’ ’e’ vIwaH.
>
>
>
> *@Voragh:*
>
> qu’! pab lo’mey cho’aghta’mo’ qatlho’ :)
>
>
>
> *@’arHa:*
>
>> “jaqbogh ’ach maw’bogh ’ej wochbogh yaS Qup vIlegh.”
>> I think this is alright but why do it that way? -> Consider: {{yaS Qup
>> vIlegh. jaq, woch... 'ach maw'qu'!}}
>
> Yes it makes sense too. But in this case, wouldn’t it shift the focus of
> the text?
>
>
> 1/ “jaqbogh ’ach maw’bogh ’ej wochbogh yaS Qup vIlegh”
>
> I feel that here the focus of the sentence is more on the description of
> the officer that I’m seeing, with his 1st three attributes <jaq>, <maw’>,
> <woch> on an equal footing, and <Qup> being considered the most essential
> attribute, since it’s directly added after <yaS>.
>
>
> We can show the highlight as below:
>
> <I see a *young officer*, (who is) tall, bold but crazy.>
>
>
> The way I interpret things (and correct me if I’m wrong) is that, in
> Klingon, if we put a normal adjective just after the noun, then it would be
> considered as the noun’s main / defining attribute, and the relative
> clauses would then describe secondary attributes.
>
>
> Following this assumption, if we shuffle it around a bit, we could insist
> more on the fact that the main attribute of the officer is, for example,
> being “tall” instead of “young”:
>
> “jaqbogh ’ach maw’bogh ’ej Qupbogh yaS woch vIlegh”
>
> <I see a *tall officer*, (who is) young, bold but crazy.>
>
>
> or if we want to put absolutely all attributes on an equal footing, then
> we use –bogh everywhere, so the main object of the sentence is no longer a
> tall or young officer (who is bold but crazy…), but just “an officer” (who
> is young, tall etc):
>
> “Qupbogh ’ej wochbogh ’ej jaqbogh ’ach maw’bogh yaS vIlegh”
>
> <I see a young, tall, bold but crazy *officer*.>
>
>
>
> 2/ yaS Qup vIlegh. jaq, woch... 'ach maw'qu'
>
> Here there are 2 statements so each statement highlights a different focus
> point.
>
>
> -        yaS Qup vIlegh : focus on “I see an officer” (the “core” part of
> the action, with no descriptive element)
> -        jaq, woch... 'ach maw'qu': the description of the officer that I
> see, with an emphasis on “… but he is really crazy”
>
>
> So it seems to bring a different nuance from what I'd suggested.
>
>
>
> Sorry if I over-analyze it though! (I like to go into the details, and
> this is also really important in translation) Let me know what you think
> :)
>
>
> Also, next time, maybe it’s best if I don’t use the KLBC anymore, so
> everyone is free to join the conversation directly if they want.
>
>
> ~mughwI'
>
> 2016-09-30 0:35 GMT+02:00 John R. Harness <cartweel at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all --
>>
>> Lieven:
>> "And regarding your question, you already answered it yourself - but
>> I'll let the BG tell you why."
>>
>> Actually I don't know why, other than that's how people do it. Maybe
>> because it starts to produce parsing errors?
>>
>> mughwI':
>> “jaqbogh ‘ach maw’bogh ‘ej wochbogh yaS Qup vIlegh.”
>>
>> I think this is alright but why do it that way? -> Consider: {{yaS Qup
>> vIlegh. jaq, woch... 'ach maw'qu'!}}
>>
>> 'arHa
>>
>> --
>>
>> Socialist Alternative <http://www.socialistalternative.org/>
>> Klingon Language Institute <http://www.kli.org/>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Lieven:
>>> > And regarding your question, you already answered it yourself - but
>>> I'll
>>> > let the BG tell you why.
>>>
>>> Aurélie Demonchaux:
>>> >> Is there a canon reference somewhere listing several adjectives
>>> >> linked to the same noun? As in:
>>>
>>> While we're waiting for the BG here are the references you requested:
>>>
>>>   romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'
>>>   Romulan hunter-killer probe (KCD)
>>>
>>>   SuDbogh Dargh 'ej wovbogh
>>>   The tea that is {SuD} and light. (KGT)
>>>    (i.e. light green tea)
>>>
>>>   Suto'vo'qor botlhDaq
>>>     pe'vIl joqchu'taH
>>>     quvbogh 'ej valbogh tIqDu' tIQ
>>>   [translation unavailable] (PB)
>>>
>>>
>>> This last example is controversial so I wouldn't advise using it:
>>>
>>>   yoHbogh matlhbogh je SuvwI'
>>>     Say'moHchu' may' 'Iw
>>>   The blood of battle washes clean
>>>     the warrior brave and true. (Anthem)
>>>
>>> It's the only known example of the pattern {X-bogh Y-bogh je NOUN} --
>>> possibly because it's a song lyric and the translation had to fit the meter.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Voragh
>>> tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a'
>>> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
>>> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
>>> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
>> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
>> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20160930/cc987588/attachment-0003.htm>