<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/31/2021 7:38 PM, Alan Anderson
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFK8js019KXbSyRw=0p41DyA7p1MF5aiHMRjDfWe4POKjfcE9A@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div dir="ltr">On Sun, Oct 31, 2021 at 6:12 PM Will Martin <<a
            href="mailto:willmartin2@mac.com" moz-do-not-send="true"
            class="moz-txt-link-freetext">willmartin2@mac.com</a>>
          wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
            <div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
              <div>If we had a verb for “be alarmed”, you could say,
                {yI-[be alarmed]Qo’}, but the verb is {ghum} — “alarm,
                sound an alarm”. In a Statement, we could build “be
                alarmed” out of {glumlu’}, but when you put the {yI-} on
                it, the subject is expected to be the First Person.</div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
          <div><br>
          </div>
          <div>Or you could say {yay'} "be shocked, dumbfounded" or
            {bIt} "be nervous, uneasy". The English "be alarmed" doesn't
            really have anything to do with alarms.<br>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>Agreed. <b>ghum</b> refers to becoming aware of something; <i>alarmed</i>
      has to do with an emotional state.</p>
    <p>I would have no trouble reading <b>bItqu' </b>as <i>be
        alarmed.</i> Nervousness or uneasiness, taken to an extreme,
      could be a state of alarm.<br>
    </p>
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFK8js019KXbSyRw=0p41DyA7p1MF5aiHMRjDfWe4POKjfcE9A@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div>{yI-} is *not* a First Person prefix, but I will assume
            you know it's Second Person subject and just misspoke.</div>
          <div> </div>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
            0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
            rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
            <div style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
              <div>Well, the statement “I am alarmed,” would be
                {vIghumlu’} or “-indefinite subject- alarms me."<br>
              </div>
              <div><br>
              </div>
              <div>Does the imperative prefix do the same {-lu’} trick
                pointing to the object instead of the subject? Is
                {yIghumlu’} valid for “Be alarmed!”?</div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
          <div><br>
            I'm going to have to go with an unequivocal "No".  The
            indefinite subject suffix doesn't "point" the meaning of a
            word to anything that the word doesn't normally point to. It
            *always* means the subject is indefinite. That is completely
            incompatible with imperatives, which *always* have a
            second-person subject.</div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <p>Agreed. Imperative impersonal subject makes no semantic sense in
      Klingon.</p>
    <p>I might translate this as <b>yIbItqu'Qo'</b> or <b>yIbItHa'qu''eghmoH.</b><br>
    </p>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
  </body>
</html>