May 2019 - tlhIngan-Hol - lists.kli.org

Klingon Word of the Day: luS
by Klingon Word of the Day 25 May '19

25 May '19

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, May 23, 2019 Klingon word: luS Part of speech: verb Definition: be submerged in, immersed in, surrounded by Source: qep'a' 25 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

10 38

Here kitty kitty.. Here kitty kitty..
by mayqel qunen'oS 24 May '19

24 May '19

reH, vIghro'mey DIbopmo' mu'tlheghmeywIj, jIpuQ jay' ! I've had it with cat sentences ! jImev vIneH, jImevnISqu'.. I want to stop, I *need* to stop.. Qu'vatlh ! tlhIngan Hol, ghu'vammo' qapIch ! damn you klingon for doing this to me ! 'a, jIjatlhnISqu'.. nevertheless, I *need* to say.. HIghoS vIghro'oy vIghro'oy.. HIghoS vIghro'oy vIghro'oy.. here kitty kitty.. here kitty kitty.. wejpuH.. muQIH rIntaH tlhIngan Hol.. klingon has messed me up.. 'ej DaH jIQongchoH.. ~ m. qunen'oS DIvI' vIghro' wItlha'taHqu'

3 3

How "physical" is physical ?
by mayqel qunen'oS 24 May '19

24 May '19

Do you consider the following, to be "physical" so that we could add {-Daq} to them ? qul QIb tamghay tIH (ray, beam) Or is "physical", something we can actually touch with our physical hands ? ~ m. qunen'oS

3 2

Klingon Word of the Day: vI'
by Klingon Word of the Day 24 May '19

24 May '19

Klingon Word of the Day for Friday, May 24, 2019 Klingon word: vI' Part of speech: verb Definition: accumulate Source: KGT (229 KE, 239 EK) This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

1 0

Sister lyrics
by M Roney 24 May '19

24 May '19

Just stumbled upon this translation of "Sister".https://lyricstranslate.com/en/sister-beni.html~naHQun Sent from my Palm Prē

3 2

Placement of the timestamp
by mayqel qunen'oS 24 May '19

24 May '19

I want to write "one day the dogs will invade to conquer us". Do I write {wa' jaj nucharghmeH, yot *dogmey*} ? Or do I write {nucharghmeH, wa' jaj yot *dogmey*} ? ~ m. qunen'oS

2 1

veQpu' or veQmey ?
by mayqel qunen'oS 22 May '19

22 May '19

I don't think there's a Ca'Non answer to this, so I'm just asking for personal opinions. Suppose I want to write a passage, where I'm talking about how people who torture animals are human trash. I start by writing {veQ Human}, but as the passage continues, I choose occasionally to write {veQ} only. When writing the plural, should I use {veQpu'} or {veQmey} ? I realize, that perhaps in english you wouldn't pluralize the "trash"; but humor me, because the issue here isn't *this* particular example. The issue here, is "if you needed to pluralize a noun, which refers to people, but that noun wasn't capable of language, would you use {-pu'} or {-mey}" ? ~ m. qunen'oS

10 22

We're here to help you
by mayqel qunen'oS 22 May '19

22 May '19

ngugh, Hargh Humanpu'.. Humanpu' Dechchu'ta' *dog*mey, vaj QIlchoH Human mut. lIb Heghna'; 'a, ngugh gheb lu'IjchoH Humanpu'. 'ej, 'engmeyvo' ghIr vIghro'mey Dujmey. Human raQDaq jaH vIghro'mey la', 'ej Human la'vaD jatlh.. <<pa'logh, nItebHa' Suvpu' vIghro'mey Humanpu' je; nItebHa' Qob wIbampu', nItebHa' mareghpu'; 'ej DaH boqvam tIQ wIquvmoHmeH tlhIH repawta'>> ~ m. qunen'oS

5 13

“In a usual manner”
by Daniel Dadap 22 May '19

22 May '19

I recently encountered the sentence *{motlh vIyIt}, where the intended meaning was “I walk in a usual manner”. The intended meaning was clear based on context and an accompanying English translation, but otherwise I would have read {motlh jIyIt} (correcting for the unusual prefix) as “I usually walk”; i.e., referring to the frequency or habitualness of the walking rather than the quality or the manner. I recommended rephrasing as {yItwI' motlh jIH}, but I suppose any number of other constructions involving the verb {motlh} rather than the adverbial would have been appropriate, e.g. {jIyIttaHvIS jImotlh}, {motlh yItmeH Ho'DoSwIj}, etc., or using other words besides {motlh} (e.g. {jIyIttaHvIS jIle'be'}), but am I wrong about the adverbial {motlh} referring to only frequency rather than manner? Could {motlh <wot>} actually be understood to mean <wot> happens in a usual manner? It seems the adverbial {motlh} was defined in KGT with just a gloss <usually, typically, as expected>, with no further clarification, and it seems to me that this could be read either as something indicating the usualness of the frequency or the manner of the verb it modifies, so I’m not sure where I got the idea from that it refers to the frequency. What canon uses, if any, have we seen of {motlh} as an adverbial, or of how to express that something happens in a usual manner?

5 4

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Punctuation
by De'vID 22 May '19

22 May '19

On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 13:11, SuStel <sustel(a)trimboli.name> wrote: > Feel free to ignore that list. It says “Klingonists agree,” but I don’t > remember any kind of referendum. > It says "Klingonists have agreed that using commas is a very useful thing to make phrases clear." While this statement is not sufficiently supported by evidence on the page itself, are you saying it's untrue? Does anyone disagree that using commas is useful for making phrases clear? This is followed by "Over time, Klingonists have generally settled on these practices on the mailing list and other online places, not as a matter of policy, but as a convention." The practices listed seem to me to generally be what is usually followed, here on this mailing list and also elsewhere when Klingon is written in Latin script as plain-text ASCII. I say "generally" because there's some variation, e.g., I use <single angle brackets> instead of the <<double angle brackets>> listed on that page. Nobody is obliged to follow common practice, but the reason it exists is because it's what most people do. > Just use whatever punctuation you think best expresses what you want and > will be best understood and accepted by your audience. > Which will probably end up being very similar to what's listed on that page. There's a reason that people avoid single and double quotation characters when writing Klingon (in Latin), it's because they're easily confused for {qaghwI'}. There's also a reason why asterisks are used for English words: it's because Okrand uses italics for this purpose, and historically italics have been indicted by asterisks in ASCII-only mailing lists. So if you try to develop your own conventions and still want to be understood, you'll very likely end up re-inventing the same conventions used by everyone else. -- De'vID

5 9