June 2019 - tlhIngan-Hol

According to Matthew chapter 10
by mayqel qunen'oS 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

..'ej yIqaw ! ..and remember ! be' DaparHa'bogh Daleghchugh, be'nallI' 'oHbe'chugh be'vam'e', 'ej be'vam DaneHqu'chugh, vaj be'vam Dangagh'eghpu', vabDot DaHotpu'be'chugh Dangagh'eghpu'; vaj ghe''orDaq yImeQ.. if you see a woman, you like her, but you're not married to her, then you have committed adultery, even if you've never touched her; so you'll burn in hell.. *middle ages* mu' ghajbe' tlhIngan Hol, 'ej 'IQ.. it's a pity klingon doesn't have a word for "middle ages".. http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/GospelOfMatthew 'ay' wa'maH 1 'ej wa'maH cha' ghojwI'pu'Daj rItDI' *jesus*, qa'pu' mIgh vujlaHmeH ghojwI'pu'Daj 'ej Hoch ropmey, Hoch pujmey je vorlaHmeH, chaHvaD teblaw' nob. 2 wa'maH cha' nuv chaH *jesus* 'oSwI'pu''e': wa'DIch, *simon* (*simon*vaD *peter* ponglu'), *andrew* (*peter* loDnI'), jemS (*zebedee* puqloD), jan (jemS loDnI'), 3 *philip*, *bartholomew*, *thomas*, *matthew* (rupmeH ghogh'otmey Huch SuqwI'), jemS (*alphaeus* puqloD), *lebbaeus* (*lebbaeus*vaD *thaddaeus* pong noblu'pu'), 4 *simon* (*canaan* ngan), *judas iscariot* (*jesus* maghpu'bogh nuv'e') je. 5 wa'maH cha' nuvpu'vam ngeHpu' *jesus*, 'ej qeSmeH jatlh: >>> *jew*pu' chaHbe'bogh nuvpu''e' tIghoSQo'; lurghchaj taw yI'elQo', 'ej *samaritan*pu' veng yI'elQo', 6 'ach yISra'el tuq DI'raqmey luchIlpu'bogh tIve'. qaq. 7 Suve'taHvIS, nuvpu'vaD pemaq 'ej pejatlh: > pawpu' chalmey wo'. < 8 ropwI'pu' tIvor, *leper*pu' tISay'moH, HeghwI'pu' tIyInqa'moH, *demon*pu' tIvuj. DaH SuHevpu' 'ej SuHevtaHvIS, pagh Huch bonobnISpu', vaj tuch SunobtaHvIS, pagh Huch yIpoQ. 9 qoghmeyrajDaq, pagh qol'om, pagh SIrlIy, pagh Sorpuq je tIghaj, 10 pagh leng buq, pagh Sut cha'DIch, pagh waqmey, pagh naQ je tItlhap; SojDaj qotlh vumwI'. 11 veng vengHom ghap bo'elDI', quvwI' yISam, 'ej pa' peratlh, vengvamvo' vengHomvamvo' ghap SutlheDpa'. 12 juH bo'eltaHvIS, juHvam yIvanmeH pejatlh: > juHvamDaq roj tu'lu'jaj. < 13 'ej quvchugh juHvam, vaj juHvam paw rojraj; 'ach quvbe'chugh, vaj lIchegh rojraj. 14 'ej lIlajbe'chugh vay', 'ej mu'meyraj QoyQo', vaj juHvamvo' vengvamvo' ghap SutlheDtaHvIS, qamDu'rajvo' Do'ol boteqmeH qamDu'raj tItav. 15 tlhIHvaD vIt vIjatlh: > *sodom* *gomorrah* je SepDaq SIQlaH vay', qaStaHvIS yoj jaj, 'ach vengvamDaq SIQlaHbe' vay'. < 16 yIlegh, SangeH, 'ej *wolf*mey Sep chIqbogh DI'raqmey'e' borur; meqvammo', gharghmey wuqmeH laH pov yIghaj, 'ach *dove*mey ghob yIghaj je. 17 tlhIHvaD rIpmey jaHmoH nuvpu', 'ej chIrghmeychajDaq lIqIpmeH, qIpmeH tlhegh lulo'; vaj peyep. 18 'ej jIHmo', che'wI'pu'vaD ta'pu'vaD SepmeyvaD je SumaqmeH, che'wI'pu'Daq ta'pu'Daq je boqemlu'. 19 'ach, chaHDaq boqemlu'DI', mu'mey bojatlhnISbogh tInabQo', jatlhmeH Ho'DoS bolo'nISbogh yInabQo', 'ej pebItQo'; ngugh, tlhIHvaD mu'mey bojatlhnISbogh lunoblu'; 20 SujangtaHvIS, Sujatlhbe' tlhIH'e', 'ach jatlh lIDabbogh vavra' qa'. 21 HeghmeH loDnI'Daj, loDnI' magh loDnI', 'ej HeghmeH puqDaj, puq magh vav, 'ej vavpu'chajmo' SoSpu'chajmo' je Daw' puqpu', 'ej vavpu'chaj SoSpu'chaj je HoH puqpu'vam. 22 'ej pongwIjmo' lImuStaH Hoch. 'ach, SIQchu'pu'bogh nuv 'ej buppu'be'bogh toDlu'. 23 vengvamvo' SuHaw'meH boraDlu'DI', latlh veng bojaHmeH petlheD. tlhIHvaD vIt vIjatlh > Hoch yISra'el vengmey bochIqpu'; pawpa' Human puqloD, Qu'vam boturlaHbe'. < 24 pagh ghojwI' nIv law' ghojmoHwI' nIv puS, 'ej pagh toy'wI''a' nIv law' joHDaj nIv puS. 25 tagha', ghojmoHwI'Daj rurchu'chugh ghojwI' vaj ghojwI'vamvaD yap, 'ej tagha', joHDaj rurchu'chugh toy'wI''a', vaj toy'wI''a'vamvaD yap. juH pIn'a'vaD *beelzebul* ponglu'pu'chugh, vaj jaSHa' juHDaj nuvpu' lupongbe'lu' ? 26 nuvpu'vam tIbamvIpQo'; tagha', Hoch vellu'pu'bogh 'anglu', 'ej tagha' Hoch So'lu'pu'bogh Sovlu'. 27 qaStaHvIS Hurghchu'ghach, mu'mey Sajatlhbogh, qaStaHvIS wovchu'ghach mu'meyvam tIjatlh, 'ej qoghDaq vay' tlhuplu'chugh, bebmeyDaq vay'vam yImaq. 28 'ej porgh luHoHbogh nuvpu' 'ach qa' luHoHlaHbe'bogh tIbamvIpQo'. *gehenna*Daq qa' porgh je ngeHlaHchugh vay', vaj vay'vam yIbamvIp. 29 wa' *assarion* 'oHbe''a' cha' *sparrow*mey DIlmeH Huch'e' ? 'ach, yavDaq pum pagh *sparrow* 'e' chaw'be'chugh vavra'. 30 tlhIH'e' vabDot nachDu'raj jIb toghlu'pu'. 31 vaj peHajQo'; tlhIH pIm law' *sparrow*mey law' pIm puS. 32 nuvpu' tlhopDaq, mulajchugh vay', vaj chal vavwI' tlhopDaq nuvvvam vIlaj je. 33 'ach nuvpu' tlhopDaq, mulajQo'chugh vay', vaj chal vavwI' tlhopDaq nuvvvam vIlajQo' je. 34 tera'Daq roj vIqaSmoHmeH jIpawpu' 'e' yIHarQo'; roj 'oHbe' ngoQwIj'e'. taj 'oH ngoQwIj'e'. 35 nuvvaD vavDaj vIqaDmoHmeH, puqbe'vaD SoSDaj vIqaDmoHmeH, 'ej tlhoghbogh be'vaD loDnalDaj SoS vIqaDmoHmeH jIpawpu'. 36 'ej juHDaj nuvpu' chaH nuv jaghpu''e'. 37 mumuSHa'chugh vay', 'ach vavDaj SoSDaj joq muSHa'qu', vaj muqotlhbe' nuvvam. 'ej mumuSHa'chugh vay', 'ach puqloDDaj puqbe'Daj joq muSHa'qu', vaj muqotlhbe' nuvvam. 38 'ej joy'meH me'cheDDaj tlhapbe'chugh vay', 'ej jIH 'emDaq tlha'be'chugh, vaj muqotlhbe' nuvvam. 39 yInDaj toDchugh vay' Hegh nuvvam, 'ej jIHmo' Heghchugh vay', vaj yInDaj Suq nuvvam. 40 mulaj lIlajbogh vay', 'ej mungeHbogh ghaH'e' laj mulajbogh vay'. 41 tuch rItwI' ghaHmo' nuv'e', nuvvam lajchugh vay', vaj tuch rItwI' pop Hev, 'ej ghob nuv ghaHmo' nuv'e', nuvvam lajchugh vay', vaj ghob nuv pop Hev. 42 'ej ghojwI'pu'wI' chaHmo' ramwI'pu'vam'e', wa'vaD wa' HIvje' bIQ bIr nobchugh vay', vaj > tlhIHvaD vIt vIjatlh < popDaj weSbe' vay'vam. <<< ~ hkjkhjhj

2 4

Archive of past qep'a' & qepHommey
by mayqel qunen'oS 28 Jun '19

28 Jun '19

Each year one qep'a' and one qepHom take place. And as soon as they have taken place, the corresponding leaflet, which reveals the new vocabulary, grammar etc, is posted on this list. The only leaflets/pdf etc, that I have are the ones of the qep'a'/qepHommey having taken place from the summer of 2016, until now, since I joined this list, a few months before 2016. Can I find somewhere, the archive of the past qep'a'/qepHommey ? Is there an archive somewhere ? ~ m. qunen'oS

4 14

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase
by SuStel 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

On 6/27/2019 9:22 AM, terrence.donnelly wrote: > Since when has any suffix besides -'e' been legal on either noun > which is the subject or object of a relative verb? Did Okrand change > his statement that he couldn't make it work as anything but subject or > object and I missed it? I think you've misunderstood what Okrand was saying. <http://klingonska.org/canon/1995-06-holqed-04-2-a.txt> Lawrence's question was "We know that the head-noun of a relative clause can be the subject or the object; the question is, can it be any other case?" He means the head noun can be the subject or the object of the relative clause, not the main clause. When Okrand said "I couldn't make the *-bogh* thing work for me with anything other than subject or object," he means the head noun couldn't be, for instance, a locative attached to the relative clause. That's the "ship in which I fled" problem. You can construct a relative clause around a ship that does something or a ship which has something done to it, but you can't construct relative clause around a ship in which, for which, or because of which something is done. Good: *mutlha' Duj vIjunpu'bogh*/ The ship which I evaded chases me./ *mutlha' mujunpu'bogh Duj */The ship which evaded me chases me./ Bad: *mutlha' DujDaq jIjunpu'bogh */The ship in which I evaded chases me. /(NOT ALLOWED) But the following works fine, because the head noun, though a locative for the main clause, is still just the object of the relative clause: *DujDaq vIjunpu'bogh jIghoq */I spy aboard the ship which evaded me./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name

6 10

And now..
by mayqel qunen'oS 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

HIQoy 'ej peqIm. pa'logh.. atlantis tIQDaq.. vIghro' tIQ tu'lu'.. wa' ram, Doy'qu'mo' vIghro'vam, wa' 'unwat leghDI', nom pa' jaH, 'ej vatlh'eghpu'DI', QongchoH. qaStaH ram, 'ej ghanHa' Hoch. 'a, meqmo' Sovbe'lu'bogh, qaStaHvIS ramvam, vem vIghro'. 'ej vemDI', Qongbe'bogh nuvpu' legh !!! SIbI', QeHqu'choH.. Hoch HIv, Hoch Sang, 'ej tagha', yu'eghmey veH bIngDaq atlantis 'oqmoH.. vaj, lutvammo', peghoj ! peghoj 'ej peHeQ ! QongtaHvIS Depvam Dun, peQong je ! vaj, DaH, QongchoHpu'mo' 'elaDya' vIghro'mey tIQ, jIQongchoH je.. ~ m. qunen'oS

1 0

Klingon Word of the Day: 'oq
by Klingon Word of the Day 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, June 27, 2019 Klingon word: 'oq Part of speech: verb Definition: sink Source: qep'a' 25 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

is it necessary to state the topic noun in a {-bogh} clause ?
by mayqel qunen'oS 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

Okay, I've no idea what "topic noun" or "clause" is, because at the brain factory, someone forgot to install in my brain the "ability to understand grammar terms" circuit.. But I wrote the title this way because it sounds cool.. Anyways, lets get to the point.. Suppose I write a looong passage, with regards to romulans who feed a cat. At the story there is a third party, which is "we". At some point, I want to say "we respect the romulans who see the cat". Normally, that would be: {vIghro' luje'bogh romuluSnganpu' DIvuv} The question now is: At the klingon sentence above, do I *have* to write/include the {romuluSnganpu'} ? Would it be correct to just write {vIghro' luje'bogh DIvuv}, with the {DI-} obviously referring to the (obviously) plural subject of {je'} ? Remember, that the passage is looong, that there are only three parties involved (the cat, the romulans, and us), and that by the time we come to the need to write the sentence we talk about, it's crystal clear that it is the romulans we respect. ~ m. qunen'oS

2 1

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase
by Daniel Dadap 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

> On Jun 27, 2019, at 08:22, terrence.donnelly <terrence.donnelly(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > Since when has any suffix besides -'e' been legal on either noun which is the subject or object of a relative verb? Did Okrand change his statement that he couldn't make it work as anything but subject or object and I missed it? Huh, I’m new here so I hadn’t been aware that there was a restriction that relative clauses can only act as subjects or objects. I swear I’ve seen counterexamples besides what we’re discussing right now, but they were probably non-canon examples. > >> On 6/27/2019 9:00 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote: >>> On Jun 27, 2019, at 01:46, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'vaD gha'tlhIq vIbom. >> Why not {qeylISvaD lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'}? > These mean very different things. > Right, and the version with {qeylISvaD} is the one that matches De'vID’s English sentence. Hence my asking why not {qeylISvaD}.

1 1

two type-5 on a {-bogh} phrase
by mayqel qunen'oS 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

Out of curiosity, since I can't think of an example.. Lets say we have a {-bogh} phrase, e.g. {bartIq leghbogh vIghro'}. Is there a rule which prohibits, one of the nouns having a type-5, e.g. {-'e'}, *and* at the same time the other noun having a type-5 too, e.g. {-mo'}, {-Daq}, {-vo'}, {-vaD} ? ~ m. qunen'oS

6 9

Doch yIngu'.
by Lieven L. Litaer 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

qaStaHvIS lup wa'logh qaS. qaStaHvIS tup wa'logh qaS. qaStaHvIS rep wa'logh qaS. qaStaHvIS jaj paghlogh qaS. Doch vIDelbogh yIngu'. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/KlingonLanguage

3 2

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Doch yIngu'.
by Michael Kúnin 27 Jun '19

27 Jun '19

> qaStaHvIS lup wa'logh qaS. > qaStaHvIS tup wa'logh qaS. > qaStaHvIS rep wa'logh qaS. > qaStaHvIS jaj paghlogh qaS. > > Doch vIDelbogh yIngu'. --------- {pay} tlhIngan Hol ngutlh 'oH'a'?

1 0