February 2020 - tlhIngan-Hol

'Iv Dun law' 'Iv Dun puS ?
by mayqel qunen'oS 14 Feb '20

14 Feb '20

j.r.r. tolkien tu'lu'.. 'ej h.p. lovecraft tu'lu' je.. Dun vay', 'a Dunqu' vay'.. 'Iv ghaH 'Iv'e' ? DaH, mu'tlheghvam wIqelnIS.. ~ mayqel qunen'oS

2 2

Klingon Word of the Day: vulqangan
by Klingon Word of the Day 13 Feb '20

13 Feb '20

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, February 13, 2020 Klingon word: vulqangan Part of speech: noun Definition: Vulcan (person) Source: TKD This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

law' puS construction with 'Iv or nuq
by mayqel qunen'oS 13 Feb '20

13 Feb '20

Could we say the following ? 'Iv Dun law' Hoch Dun puS ? who's the greatest of all ? vIghro'vam tun law' nuq tun puS ? what is softer than this cat ? Perhaps they seem weird, but I can't find anything wrong, nor can I think of any rules that they actually break.. ~ mayqel qunen'oS

2 2

thinking in aspect
by mayqel qunen'oS 12 Feb '20

12 Feb '20

Klingon doesn't have a passive voice.. instead, it has the indefinite subject suffix {-lu'}, which means "someone/something unspecified does/is". Now.. True, one *could* translate the sentence {vIghro' leghlu'} as "the cat is seen", but the exact/literal translation of this sentence, is "someone/something unspecified sees the cat". Back in the day, when I was starting out, being more of a beginner than I'm now, I remember always translating in my mind the {-lu'} as being passive voice. Until one day, I started translating it as "someone/something unspecified does/is", an event which changed many things, with regard to when and how I would be using it, but that would be the subject of another mail.. So, what does all this has to do with aspect ? Klingon, not only lacks a passive voice, but it lacks tenses too. Saying {yotwI' Suv 'avwI'} can mean any of the following: the guard fights the intruder the guard fought the intruder the guard will fight the intruder All these alternate translations are valid, and the thing which will define which of them is meant by the author, depends either on context, or on the presence of time stamps. But lets say, I write: {wa'Hu', yotwI' Suv 'avwI'} What does it mean ? Some time ago, when I'd see it, without hesitation, I'd translate it as "yesterday, the guard fought the intruder". But recently I realized, that as in the case of the {-lu'} the literal translation isn't passive voice, here too, the literal translation is different.. It's not "yesterday, the guard fought the intruder"; it's rather "yesterday, the guard fights the intruder". Now, perhaps someone may wonder: "is this distinction important, and if yes then why ?". I think, that It's *very* important, because once someone begins to think in the literal meaning of what the grammar of the sentence in question actually says, then he'll be better able to use aspect properly, depending on what he actually wants to say. Lets see an example: {wa'Hu', yotwI' Suvmo' 'avwI', QeHchoH HoD} = Yesterday, because the guard fights the intruder, the captain becomes angry. (the two events happen simultaneously) {wa'Hu', yotwI' Suvpu'mo' 'avwI', QeHchoHpu' HoD} = Yesterday, because the guard has fought the intruder, the captain has become angry. (the event of the guard fighting the intruder has been completed, the captain became angry sometime either during the fight or after it had been completed, and the event of the becoming of the captain has been also completed) {wa'Hu', yotwI' Suvpu'mo' 'avwI', QeHchoH HoD} = Yesterday, because the guard has fought the intruder, the captain becomes angry. (the event of the guard fighting the intruder has been completed, and then the captain becomes angry because of that event) {wa'Hu', yotwI' Suvmo' 'avwI', QeHchoHpu' HoD} = Yesterday, because the guard fights the intruder, the captain has become angry. (the guard fights the intruder, without their fight having being completed, but the event of the becoming angry of the captain is completed) .. As is seen from these examples, there are variations between the meaning of each sentence, which variations can only be perceived if someone understands *exactly* what his eyes are actually reading, without assigning the meaning of past tense to a verb, just because that verb is being preceded by a {wa'Hu'}. Or the meaning of future tense, just because the verb is being preceded by a {wa'leS}. ~ mayqel qunen'oS

2 2

Klingon Word of the Day: way'
by Klingon Word of the Day 12 Feb '20

12 Feb '20

Klingon Word of the Day for Wednesday, February 12, 2020 Klingon word: way' Part of speech: verb Definition: parry, deflect a lunge Source: KGT (230 KE, 239 EK) This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

"Make your own language"?
by Sai 12 Feb '20

12 Feb '20

How would you say "make your own language" in Klingon? I.e., with the contrastive sense "don't just look at this Klingon, do some conlanging yourself". Note: I intend to use this commercially, eg to put on a shirt or the like & sell online. I intend to give 30% of net proceeds to the LCS, 30% to the KLI, 20% to whomever helps translate this, & 20% to myself. So, if you respond, please separately respond privately to let me know how/if you'd like to get paid. No deadline, so don't rush. Thanks! Sincerely, Sai Founder, Language Creation Society Sent from my mobile phone; please excuse the concision & autocorrect errors.

4 6

'uSgheb qep
by Jackson Bradley 11 Feb '20

11 Feb '20

Hello all! For those who may not have heard: the *'uSgheb qep* will be taking place in Lille, France from April 23rd to April 25th 2020. We intend on meeting up in the *Médiathèque Jean Levy*. I believe that some also plan on sticking around on Sunday to chat and practice together. A full list of planned activities will be listed here in the coming weeks, so please do keep an eye out for that! There is no official hotel, though there are a number of an inexpensive hostels in the city center, such as the Hôtel Première Classe Lille Centre, Gastama, and Hôtel F1 Lille Métropole. T-shirts are now available for purchase, even to those not attending the meeting. You can buy them from Spreadshirt at the following link: https://www.spreadshirt.com/create-your-own?productType=210&view=1&draft=dN… I hope to see some of y'all present at the meeting! Best, DeSDu'

1 0

melkor maqlegh mu'mey Qav
by mayqel qunen'oS 11 Feb '20

11 Feb '20

rItmeH mu'mey jatlhpu'DI', nargh lojmIt'a'.. melkor qo' 'elmeH taw 'oH lojmIt'a'vam'e', 'ej DInvam 'elpa' melkor maqlegh, wa' ngoD Sovchu': lojmItvam'a' luveghpu' nuv law', 'ach cheghpu' pagh.. pa', QamtaHvIS maqlegh, pe'vll lojmIt'a'vo' luqIptaH meQbogh SuSmey, 'ej melkor qo'mey mIgh leghchoHtaHvIS, loQ baw'Ha'choH. yabDajDaq narghchoH yInDaj vorgh mIlloghmey, 'ej chaq ngugh qa'Daj Dop Hurgh QapchoH qa'Daj Human Dop. 'a, SIbI', wanI'mey SIQpu'bogh qawchoH, 'ej tIqDaj charghqa'chu' QeH. vaj, nachDaj tlhe'choH, 'ej tera' leghqa'pu'DI', jatlh, qorDu'Daj juppu'Daj je QubtaHvIS: .. ghargh puqpu', SunIDpu'; SunIDpu', 'a SuQappu'be'. jaghna'ra' jIHchoHpu', 'ej reH jaghna'ra' jIHtaH. mu'meyvam jatlhpu' melkor maqlegh, 'ej ghIq lojmIt'a' veghpu'. ~ mayqel qunen'oS

1 0

Using -taH with pronouns as "to be"
by David Holt 11 Feb '20

11 Feb '20

I swear I posted this on the mailing list before, but when I mentioned it to someone they seemed to think I hadn't. So here it is just to be sure... At qep'a' last year (July 2019) I had a hallway conversation with Dr. Okrand where I discussed the use of the {-taH} suffix on pronouns as "to be". I pointed out that canon seemed to have a tendency to use {-taH} when the subject was mobile and leave it off when the subject was immobile, but we had not been given any rule regarding that use. He responded (with confidence and without time for consideration) that it was not a rule, but a tendency. It is not wrong to leave {-taH} off when talking about mobile objects or to add it on when talking about a mobile object, but that Maltz indeed seemed to follow the tendencies which had been pointed out. janSIy

3 3

.. but eventually s#@! happens
by mayqel qunen'oS 11 Feb '20

11 Feb '20

ghaytan, Human qa' DI'on le' 'oH.. tuch qeltaHvIS Hoch, tul; 'ej tIqchajDaq jatlh: tagha', QaQ Hoch; jIHvaD qaS qabbogh pagh. jIle'.. Qub Hoch nuv; 'ej tIqDajDaq jatlh: jIle'mo', qaStaHvIS tuch, not lot vIbamnIS. not jIHvaD qaS Qugh.. not taw vIDabchoH, not jIropqu'choH.. qaStaHvIS tuch, reH jIHvaD nuvpu' tu'lu'.. 'ej reH, tagha', vItoDlu'.. 'a, SanDaj nargh pagh; Hoch qIp yIn, ghIq qIpqa', 'ej pIj qaSchoHtaHvIS ghu'mey qay', not mevlaw' ghu'meyvam. ..vaj, wa' jaj, tagha', tlhoj nuv: HochvaD qaS qay'chu'bogh ghu'mey. le' pagh, 'ej bIS'ub ghajbe'bej lot Daqrab. ~ mayqel qunen'oS

1 0