[tlhIngan Hol] 'InHom ('ay' wa')

[Michael Roney, Jr.]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 1:25 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> On 1/8/2017 6:54 PM, Michael Roney, Jr. wrote:
>
> ben law', loD tu'lu'.
> be'nal ghaj loD.
> yatlhlaHbe' be'nal.
>
> QorghwaghDaq ghaHtaHvIS be'nal;
> Du'Hom leghlaH.
>
>
> Qorwagh

Typo snuck in there.
Paper copy has the correct spelling.
It's interesting to see that my fingers know to follow 'g' with 'h' when
typing Klingon.

>
> It would be fine to say QorwaghDajvo' Du'Hom leghlaH be'nal.

I was wanting to aim for that, but wasn't sure how to phrase it.

>
> But if you do use ghaHtaHvIS, remember to put the -'e' on the subject:
QorwaghDaq ghaHtaHvIS be'nal'e'.

I should have caught that one.

>
>
> Du'Hom 'IH.
>
>
> 'IH Du'Hom.

I thought it was that way, but I doubled checked myself in TKD and switched
it.
I must have been on the wrong page.

>
>
> yav vel tI.
> naH pov law' Hoch pov puS.
>
>
> I'm not quite sure how to understand this. Vegetables are the most
excellent. Do you mean the vegetables in THIS garden are more excellent
than those of any other garden? There are a few ways to say that:
>
> Hoch Du'Hommey naH'e' Du'Homvam naH pov law' Hoch pov puS
> of all gardens' vegetables, this garden's vegetables are the most
excellent
>
> which could probably be shortened to
>
> Hoch Du'Hommey'e' naHvam pov law' Hoch pov puS
> of all gardens, these vegetables are the most excellent
>
> Or you could say:
>
> Du'Homvam naH pov law' Hoch latlh Du'Hommey naH pov puS
> this garden's vegetables are more excellent than every other garden's
vegetables
>

Yes, that's what I meant.
I'll go study some more law'/puS constructions to get a better feel on how
to use them.

>
> Du'Hom Dech chevwI' tlhoy'.
> Du'Hom ghaj 'IDnar pIn'a'.
>
>
> While this is probably perfectly acceptable, I sometimes have trouble
accepting ghaj as an expression of ownership instead of possession. You
could say instead, 'IDnar pIn'a' Du'Hom 'oH it is a wizard's garden.
>

I wouldn't have used it except that boQwI' had "own" as a gloss under
{ghaj}.
It struck me as odd, but I went with it.
5 seconds of research shows that it probably came from Monopoly.

>
> Hoch ghIj 'IDnar pIn'a'.
>
> Du'Hom leghtaHvIS be'nal;
> DIghna' por tu'.
> DeH.
> baQ.
> SuD.
>
> neH.
>
>
> If it is important to maintain the single-syllable sound of this
progression, then that's fine. But I had to take a moment to realize the
last word was no longer using the DIghna' leaf as its subject. If the
monosyllable is not important, then expand it to at least neH ghaH if not
the unabridged DIghna' por neH ghaH.
>

You're right. I did change the subject on you.
While I liked the single syllable after it was on the page, it isn't
necessary.

>
> wa'maH cha' pemmey wa'maH cha' rammey je, por neH.
> chabalHom chabal chabal'a' neHtaH.
>
>
> majQa'!
>

Oh good, I was actually worried about that one.

>
> qurchoH.
>
> DIghna' por ghajlaHbe'. net Sov
> pujchoH.
> chISchoH.
> 'ItchoH.
>
> bIt loD.
> ghel:
> <nuqneH, be'nalwI'?>
>
>
> nuqneH is used as a greeting; I don't think it's meant for this sort of
thing. nuq DaneH would be appropriate.
>

True.

>
> jang:
> <DIghna' porvam vISoplaHchughbe', vaj jIHegh.>
>
>
> You can't put rovers after type 9 verb suffixes. But you don't need to:
vISoplaHbe'chugh if I cannot eat it.
>

Forgot about that rule, thanks.

>
> be'nalDaj SaH loD.
> Qub loD:
> <Hegh be'nalwI' vIneHbe'.
> DIghna' por vISuqqang.>
>
> choS, tlhoy' toS.
> nom DIghna' por Suq.
> be'nalDaj nob.
> por mIQ be'nal.
> Sop.
> 'ey!
>
> 'ach tlhoy DIghna' por tIv.
>
> wa'leS, DIghna' por neHtaH.
> vaj choS, tlhoy' toSqa'.
> DIghna' por Suq.
> ngugh 'IDnar pIn'a' legh.
> ghIj.
>
>
> You've switched subjects again without it being clear what you're doing.
Without the cultural hint that wizards catching men stealing stuff from
their gardens are more likely to scare the men than the men are to scare
the wizards, it would be hard to distinguish who's doing the scaring here.
It would be the same in English if I said, "He climbed the wall. He got the
leaf. Then he saw the wizard. He scared him." Who's doing the scaring?
>
> Fortunately, it's all right in Klingon if you want to be redundant, more
so than in English. Just say loD ghIj 'IDnar.

I seem to have a history of that. I think Qob has chastised me on this
before.

>
> By the way, for those verbs that are completed in the telling, use -pu'
or -ta' to indicate this. So you probably want to use DIghna' por Suqpu' or
DIghna' por Suqta', but probably just loD ghIj 'IDnar, unless you mean the
man was startled but then no longer scared.
>
> There are a number of sentences here that you haven't added perfective to
that you probably should have, and I haven't pointed them out.

My goal for the year is to pass the KLCP Level 2, which includes the aspect
suffixes.
Of all the suffixes, they are the ones I understand the least.
I almost never use them.

>
>
> jatlh 'IDnar pIn'a':
> <nIHwI'!
> DIghna' por DanIH.
> qabIj.>
>
> jang loD:
> <pung!
> be'nalwI'vaD 'oH.
>
>
> This is not wrong, but I'd be tempted to use a real verb: e.g.,
be'nalwI'vaD jIvangpu'.
>

Glad I didn't get it wrong since this sentence did give me pause.

>
> DIghna' por SopnIS.
> neHqu'.
> por Supbe'chugh, Hegh.>
>
>
> Sop

This error is from my handwritten copy in which "o" and "u" are often the
same.

>
>
> jang 'IDnar pIn'a':
> <bIvItchugh;
> DIghna' por Daghaj.
> 'ach ghubDaQlI' DanobnIS.
>
>
> You could be more specific: ghubDaQlI' chonobnIS or jIHvaD ghubDaQlI'
DanobnIS.
>
>
> puq vIQorgh.
> SoS jIDa.>
>
>
> vIDa

Okay, explain.
I thought I wrote "I'll behave as a mother"
Are you saying that {vI-} is the correct way to say that?
Or are you saying that {vI-} will actually turn that into "I'll behave as a
mother to/for her"?
I'm just not sure what the object is here.

>
>
>
> lay' loD.
>
>
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
>

I appreciate the feedback

~naHQun
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170109/f3004b32/attachment-0016.htm>