[tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: mev

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Thu Aug 22 01:58:49 PDT 2019


On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 17:45, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:

> Klingon word: mev
> Part of speech: verb
> Definition: stop, cease
> _______________________________________________
>
> jImev
> I stop. KLS
>
> mev
> Do not do that! (pet command) PK
>
> SSS... mev!  ba'!
> Do not do that!  Sit! (pet command) PK
>
> yImev, yap!
> Stop!  It is enough!  KGT
>
> not mev peghmey
> Secrets never cease. (secrecy proverb) PK
>
> jIvIb.  qaSDI’ vatlh DIS poH cha’maH Hut, jImev.
> I time-travel to the 29th century. (lit. “I time-travel into the future.
> When
>   Century 29 happens, I stop.”) (qep'a' 2016)
>
> jIvIbHa’.  wejHu’ jImev.
> I time-travel three days into the past. (qep'a' 2016)
>
> bIjatlh 'e' yImev
> Shut up! (Stop speaking!) PK
>
> bIleS 'e' yImev
> Stop relaxing! Stop resting! PK
>
> bIyev 'e' yImev
> Stop breaking! Stop pausing! PK
>
> bIDum 'e' yImev
> Stop napping! PK
>
> bIjatlh 'e' yImev.  yItlhutlh!
> Stop talking! Drink! TKW
>
> Sop 'e' mev
> Stop eating! PK
>
> mamevQo'.  maSuvtaH.  ma'ov.
> Battling on through the Eternal fight. (Anthem)
>
> jatlh 'e' mevDI' qeylIS, lop
> After Kahless's words, they celebrate PB
>
> jatlh 'e' mevDI' nuvpu' mejmoH ghaH ratlh be'nalDaj luqara' neH.
> After his last words, all were sent away, but his wife Lukara. PB
>
> (KGT 113: in re {mevyap}:  No doubt in the past, the locution was longer,
> perhaps {yImev, yap!} ("Stop! It is enough!")  Actually, {yImev!} ("Stop!")
> is the imperative form if the command is given to an individual; to tell a
> group to stop, one would say {pemev!}"
>
> (KGT 154):  {mevmoH} "cause [someone] to stop" -- (compare {mev},
> "[someone] stops")
>

When {mev} is used with an object, has that object ever been anything other
than {'e'} where the sentence-as-object as the same subject as the sentence
with {'e'} as its object? That is, the subject is what stops/ceases, even
if the verb has an object.

For example, it seems you can say {jIjatlh 'e' vImev} or {bIjatlh 'e'
yImev} or {bIjatlh 'e' Damev}, but you'd have to say {bIjatlh 'e' vImevmoH}
or {jIjatlh 'e' yImevmoH} or {jIjatlh 'e' DamevmoH}, adding a {-moH} when
the subjects don't match.

There's a (non-canon) line in Hamlet's soliloquy which goes: {yIn mevbogh
mIwvam'e' wIruchqangbej} "'Tis [i.e., death] a consummation / Devoutly to
be wished." Looking at the examples of canon usage, I'm now wondering
whether it shouldn't have been {yIn mevmoHvogh mIwvam}. Of course, being
Shex'pir, this may not be standard language. {ruch} is also used with a
noun object in that sentence as well, which also strikes me as unusual and
maybe even wrong.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190822/33a4b983/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list