- tlhIngan-Hol - lists.kli.org

Aeschylus fragments hymn to Zeus
by mayqel qunen'oS 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

e Zeus is the ether, Zeus is the earth, Zeus is the heaven; yes, Zeus is everything, and whatever there may be beyond that. t Dung rewve' ghaH zeus'e', tera' ghaH zeus'e', chal'a' ghaH zeus'e'; teH, Hoch ghaH zeus'e', 'ej Hoch HayDaq Hoch tu'lu'bogh ghaH je zeus'e'. -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ

1 0

Klingon Word of the Day: pIm
by Klingon Word of the Day 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, November 11, 2021 Klingon word: pIm Part of speech: verb Definition: be different Source: TKD This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

look what the cat dragged in
by James Landau 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

Congratulations, Lieven! A truly impressive feat! (And I was surprised to learn from the wiki article that _Alice in Wonderland_ was published in 1865 -- I imagined it coming out closer to the previous turn-of-the-century.) But the obvious question for conlangers and conlang aficionados: How did you manage to translate: "-I quite agree with you, said the Duchess; and the moral of that is-’Be what you would seem to be’-or, if you’d like it put more simply-’Never imagine yourself not to be otherwise than what it might appear to others that what you were or might have been was not otherwise than what you had been would have appeared to them to be otherwise.’"? Also, *woSwa' ghew* is defined as a rolling bug. Does that mean an isopod crustacean, i.e. a pillbug? (I call them pillbugs, my mother calls them sowbugs, my sister calls them roly-polies.)

3 2

Noun-noun constructions with relative clauses
by luis.chaparro＠web.de 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

7 18

Klingon Word of the Day: nompuq
by James Landau 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

>From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin(a)gmail.com> >Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: nompuq>>> Klingon Word of the Day for Monday, October 18, 2021 >> >> Klingon word: nompuq >> Part of speech: noun >> Definition: authority, evidence, attestation, reference, citation >> Source: KLI Mailing list >> > >Pun: Wikipedia (wiki = {nom}, pedia = {puq}) There's another Wikipedia pun in the Klingon language. The word for bias is *jInbo'*, because "systemic bias", as they call it there, is a huge issue at Wikipedia.

1 0

bong SeDwI' DopDaq puH-DujwIj neSlo' Qaw'lu'
by Will Martin 11 Nov '21

11 Nov '21

qaStaHvIS HeghwI’ ram bong SeDwI' DopDaq puH-DujwIj neSlo' Qaw’lu’. wanI’ legh jIlwI’. choghvatDajDaq ba’. chuSmo’, mer. DujwIj juS, ‘ach tlhoy Summo', neSlo’ qIp ‘ej Qaw'. DujwIj tlhopDaq mev DujwI qIppu’bogh Duj’e’. batlh vang SeDwI’ ‘e’ pIH jIlwI’. ghaytan lojmItwIj ghoS ‘ej murI’ pagh DujwIjDaq rI’meH mIw QIjbogh nav’e' lan. ghobe’. Duj ‘elHa’ nuv puqpu’ je ‘ej qaStaHvIS wa’ rep <<tojmeH pagh chabHom SuqmeH>> leng. ghIq DujDaj chegh, ‘el ‘ej tlheD Duj. tlheDpa’, Duj nuD jIlwI’. nav QIn ghItlh jIlwI’. Duj Del: *to'yota’ *‘avalan chIS ‘oH. [61 VTAIL] perlu’. jaj veb, jIl nav vItu’. pervam vIyajchu’. HemmeH per ‘oH. chalDuj Del. 1961 *bIyche’ *bananSa’ *vIy tlhuQ ‘oHba’. waghchu’. mIpba’ nuvvam. ghan’Iq vIrI’ ‘ej [insurance] malja’ vIrI’. Our cars were insured by the same company. vaj vIje’nISbe’. DujwIj tI’lu’. jIQuch. pItlh charghwI’ ‘utlh (ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)

1 0

{je} "too" with negative meanings on the second sentence
by mayqel qunen'oS 10 Nov '21

10 Nov '21

yaS luHoHpu', 'a be' luHoHpu'be' je they killed the officer, but they didn't kill the woman too Seemingly/apparently the English sentence sounds strange; but is there anything wrong with the Klingon one? Is there something wrong in using the {je} "too" this way? -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ

5 6

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: romuluSngan
by luis.chaparro＠web.de 10 Nov '21

10 Nov '21

I wanted to ask something about that word, so this KWOTD is very opportune :-) Some days ago I discussed the phrase: *romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'*. Shouldn't it have been *romuluS Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'*? I've also found another canon example: *loSmaH romuluSngan SuvwI'pu' HoHta' qeng*, translated: *Kang killed 40 Romulan warriors*. Is there something I'm missing? Thank you!

3 5

Klingon Word of the Day: pep
by Klingon Word of the Day 10 Nov '21

10 Nov '21

Klingon Word of the Day for Wednesday, November 10, 2021 Klingon word: pep Part of speech: verb Definition: raise Source: TKD (99 KE, 148 EK) This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] {je} "too" with negative meanings on the second sentence
by Will Martin 10 Nov '21

10 Nov '21

I like the analysis here. It makes me wonder about related issues. In English, the conjunctions “and” and “but” have identical meaning in terms of grammar and cold logic: “I like you, but I don’t like your friend.” “I like you, and I don’t like your friend.” These are subjectively different, but logically identical. In both cases, I’m telling you two things. 1. I like you. 2. I don’t like your friend. The thing that “but” introduces is a heightened sense of contrast. In Klingon, the use of {je} as an adverbial (not as a noun conjunction) in canon suggests that it acts as a sort of context anchor to bind together two SEPARATE sentences, NOT connected with a conjunction. It suggests that the sentence with {je} is a kind of appendix to the first sentence. I finished the first sentence, but now, I realize there was something I wanted to add to it. Too late for a conjunction. I’ll create a new parallel sentence and add {je} so you know that it adds information to the previous sentence. Ignore the parallel parts. Pay attention to the new information. So, while the problem example was presented as “Is there a problem with {je} being used with a negative verb?”, there seems to be a second problem with conjoining the two sentences with {‘ach} and also putting {je} at the end. The {je} becomes redundant, which is why the natural suggestion is to omit it. So, what happens if you omit {‘ach} and make them two separate sentences? yaS luHoHpu’. be’ luHoHpu’be’ je. Then the problem becomes more obvious: They killed the officer. They also didn’t kill the woman. Now, it sounds obviously weird, because the sentences are not sufficiently parallel. SuStel made this point quite well. I’m just making it a little more obvious, and digging into a parallel issue. It’s interesting that {je} used this way to bind two grammatically separate sentences outside of grammatical construction parallels {‘ej}, which binds them grammatically. Meanwhile, we don’t have an outside-of-grammar linking word parallel to {‘ach}. I want a persimmon. I want whipped cream, too. I smelled the cupcake. I ate the cupcake, too. I liked the persimmon. I didn’t like the cupcake, however. In Klingon, the only word for “however” is {‘ach} and it’s a conjunction, not an adverbial. We don’t have an adverbial that offers that sense of contrast that you seem to be seeking. Now is it more obvious why the {je} in your example was redundant with the {‘ach} and why {‘ach} was the word to keep and {je} was the word to omit? That’s the nugget I was after when I started this. I just figured this out. Forgive the wandering to get to this point. > On Nov 10, 2021, at 9:07 AM, SuStel <sustel(a)trimboli.name> wrote: > > On 11/10/2021 7:50 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote: >> yaS luHoHpu', 'a be' luHoHpu'be' je >> they killed the officer, but they didn't kill the woman too >> >> Seemingly/apparently the English sentence sounds strange; but is there anything wrong with the Klingon one? Is there something wrong in using the {je} "too" this way? > Based on how je is presented in The Klingon Dictionary, I don't think this is how it works. It appears to be used when you want to change one element of the OVS part of a sentence and compare it to the previous sentence. > > SoHvaD 'uQ wej vIqem. > Dargh vIqem je. > Conversational Klingon. The changed element is the food brought. > > jIghung. > jIghung je. > > jI'oj. > jI'oj je. > Power Klingon. The changed element is the verb. > > 'ej ghIjpu' [tlhIngan may'Duj] > nIteb ghIjpu' je [tlhIngan wo' Degh] > Skybox SP1. The changed element is the thing doing the scaring. > > ghop luQan tajHommey. > pe'laH je. > Skybox SP2. The changed element is the verb. > > And so on. So I don't think you'd combine > > yaS luHoHpu' > and > 'a be' luHoHpu'be' je > > in this way. Here, you're changing both the object and the verb. > > Just say yaS luHoHpu' 'a be' luHoHpu'be' They killed the officer but they didn't kill the woman. The 'a but handles the unexpectedness of the woman not also being killed. If you wanted to emphasize the exception, you could say something like yaS luHoHpu' 'a yIntaHbe' 'e' luchaw' They killed the man but they permitted the woman to live. > > -- > SuStel > http://trimboli.name > _______________________________________________ > tlhIngan-Hol mailing list > tlhIngan-Hol(a)lists.kli.org > http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

1 0