[tlhIngan Hol] qep'a' webpage

[David Holt]

ghItlh mayqel qunenoS:

>> DaH qep'a' ve'meH bonablaH.


>If the {ve'} as a verb of movement follows the same rules with {jaH}, and the sentence refers to a single person, then..

>shouldn't this be {DaH qep'a'Daq Dave'meH bInablaH} or {DaH qep'a' Da'vemeH bInablaH} ?


Since the {bo-} prefix is used on the main verb, the sentence is not referring to a single person.  To be safe, this should be, {DaH qep'a'Daq bove'meH bonablaH}.  The {-Daq} is actually optional and should not be a point of contention or argument.

I believe that there are examples of {-meH} on a verb which does not appear to have a prefix and where a null prefix does not seem to make sense.  It seems that {-meH} might actually be able to take a rare infinitive.  I'm not very good a tracking canon examples, so I would love it if anyone could share a couple of them.  But now that I'm examining it more closely, I'll bet none of those examples also have a object on the {-meH} verb.  I probably took too many liberties in this translation.


> pa' SoHtaH pagh meyrI' SoHtaH!


"there you are or a square you are being" ?


I see be''etlh has given you the English idiom.  Without knowing the English idiom, I would probably translate the Klingon as, "Either you are there or you are a square."  I was being silly and did knew that it was a nonsense thing to say in Klingon.  I also knew the majority (but not all) of Klingon speakers would get the reference.


Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170705/7d213ad7/attachment-0016.htm>