- tlhIngan-Hol - lists.kli.org

Klingon Word of the Day: Han
by Klingon Word of the Day 01 Feb '18

01 Feb '18

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, February 01, 2018 Klingon word: Han Part of speech: verb Definition: be learned, be scholarly, be erudite Source: qepHom 2016 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

3 2

Klingon Word of the Day: 'apuStoQ
by Klingon Word of the Day 31 Jan '18

31 Jan '18

Klingon Word of the Day for Wednesday, January 31, 2018 Klingon word: 'apuStoQ Part of speech: noun Definition: hawk-like bird that flies particularly fast Source: Email from Okrand (see notes) This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

3 3

Klingon Word of the Day: nev'aQ
by Klingon Word of the Day 30 Jan '18

30 Jan '18

Klingon Word of the Day for Tuesday, January 30, 2018 Klingon word: nev'aQ Part of speech: noun Definition: sarcophagus (simple) Source: qep'a' 24 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

3 3

Maltz about light
by Lieven L. Litaer 30 Jan '18

30 Jan '18

Anyone who has watched Discovery might have noticed that Lorca is sensitive to light. In another scene, Burnham said that the light is different where she is. These are two different things: Marc Okrand wrote: ---begin quote------------------------------ For this, {'otlh} "photon" would work, but even though it's scientifically correct (I think), it would be confusing in a Star Trek context because of photon torpedoes and such (and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum). You're right — Klingons would have a word (at least a scientific, technical term) for the phenomenon of light (aside from {'otlh}). {wovtaHghach} is one such word. Another is {tamghay} "light, luminescence, illumination" ("illumination" here does not mean "clarification, explanation, explication" or the like). ---end quote------------------------------ Okrand later added: ---begin quote------------------------------ You're right. They are different (and, like you, I'd use {tamghay} for the examples you sent), but one's eyes could be sensitive to {wovtaHghach}. For "the light is different," however, {wovtaHghach} isn't so good (unless they're talking about the intensity of the brightness or something like that as opposed to, say, the color). ---end quote------------------------------ So when saying that Lorca is sensitive to "light", it's actually the {wovtaHghach} bothering him. Otherwise, he would have to live in absolute darkness, where there is no {tamghay}. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/DSC111

5 7

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] jItlhojpu'..
by mayqel qunenoS 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

let alone the fact that.. tlhIngan Hol ghItlhqu'lu'; net Hechbe'chugh, vaj qatlh tlhIngan Hol ghojchoHlu'pu' ? If someone doesn't intend to actually write klingon, then why has he begun learning it, in the first place ? hmm.. ~ nI'ghma On Jan 29, 2018 6:36 PM, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun(a)gmail.com> wrote: qaStaHvIS pa'logh, wa' jaj tlhIngan Hol vIghojchoH.. Dorpu'DI' jajvam, 'ej ghIq qaSpu'DI' latlh jaj puS, wa' vIt potlh vItlhojchoH. tlhIngan Hol ghojlu'meH, tlhoy tlhIngan Hol ghItlhnISlu'. qaSbe'chugh wanI'vam, vaj ghojlaHbe'bej vay'. unless someone writes his brains out, he will never learn ~ nI'ghma

2 1

jItlhojpu'..
by mayqel qunenoS 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

qaStaHvIS pa'logh, wa' jaj tlhIngan Hol vIghojchoH.. Dorpu'DI' jajvam, 'ej ghIq qaSpu'DI' latlh jaj puS, wa' vIt potlh vItlhojchoH. tlhIngan Hol ghojlu'meH, tlhoy tlhIngan Hol ghItlhnISlu'. qaSbe'chugh wanI'vam, vaj ghojlaHbe'bej vay'. unless someone writes his brains out, he will never learn ~ nI'ghma

1 0

Klingon Word of the Day: pItlhbergh
by Klingon Word of the Day 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Klingon Word of the Day for Monday, January 29, 2018 Klingon word: pItlhbergh Part of speech: noun Definition: Pittsburgh (US) Source: qepHom 2016 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

1 0

HolQeD V6-N1
by demonchaux.aurelie 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Hi all, Savan ! :) While reading Captain Krankor's contribution in HolQeD Vol 6, Number 1, I wondered if there was any other way to solve the problem he raised. Basically the issue was that the rule banning aspect suffixes after the 'e' in a sentence-as-object structure was making it impossible to translate a seemingly simple sentence: The engineer attacked while I was watching the engineer fix the transporter ionizer unit. (*) jolvoy' tI' jonwI' 'e' vIbejtaHvIS HIv jagh The above translation would be perfect except for the fact that the -taH suffix is both forbidden (because it comes after the 'e') and required before -vIS. So I thought of 2 possible solutions to try and work around it: 1/ the relative clause jolvoy' tI'bogh jonwI''e' vIbejtaHvIS HIv jagh (The enemy attacked while I was watching the engineer who was fixing the transporter ionizer unit) Pros: - grammatical Cons: - the focus of the "watching" is on the engineer rather than the whole action 2/ Nominalization and noun-noun construction jonwI' jolvoy' tI'lI'ghach vIbejtaHvIS HIv jagh (The enemy attacked while I was watching the engineer's fixing of the ionizer unit) Pros: - the focus of the "watching" is still on the entire action (the fixing of the unit by the engineer) Cons: - It may be heavy and unnatural to have a -ghach verb and a noun-noun construction with 3 nouns. What do you think on this one? Do you have other ideas on how to translate this sentence? ghItlhjaj PS: (Apologies if this has already been discussed elsewhere, if so I could not find the thread) Envoyé depuis mon smartphone Samsung Galaxy.

4 3

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Expressing "all of us"
by seruq 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

I read [Hoch maH] as " all the us's", "all the we's", as in multiple groups. It is not speaking of the entirety of a single group. As for [maH Hoch], similar to the plural suffix, unless you need to remove ambiguity, then no need to use it. Just use maH. But I can see the possibility of it's use. A: mab wIlaj maH B: chaq bolaj tlhIH 'op neH A: maghwI' vIHoH, DaH wIlaj maH Hoch - DloraH

3 2

Expressing "all of us"
by mayqel qunenoS 29 Jan '18

29 Jan '18

Sometime ago, I had asked of a way to say "all of us", as if in "all of us like cats". In particular, I had asked if we could write {vIghro' DImuSHa' Hoch}. And as we had said back then, we can't say something like this because it would violate the accord rule. maj. However, I just had an idea, which I would like to discuss. Why not write: {vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH Hoch} ? all of us love cats Does it violate any rule ? I think it is correct and grammatical. Let alone that we could place an {-'e'} on the {Hoch} for added emphasis, thus writing {vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH Hoch'e'}. Anyway, if anyone believes it is wrong, then do tell me before I start using it. Because qeylIS knows, I will be using as if there's no tomorrow.. ~ nI'ghma

4 11