- tlhIngan-Hol - lists.kli.org

Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Ha'DIbaHvam Doj bongu'laH'a'?
by mayqel qunenoS 17 Nov '16

17 Nov '16

QaQ {-chugh} bopbogh De''e', 'ach Ha'DIbaH wIbuS. 'e' 'ut ! qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 17 Nov 2016 9:43 pm, "Steven Boozer" <sboozer(a)uchicago.edu> wrote: Hmm… the inverse happened when these famous lines were translated >From the original Klingon of SeQpIr (cf. TKW p.131): *cheqotlhchugh maHaghbe''a'*? *cheDuQchugh mareghbe''a'*? *cheQIHchugh manoDbe''a'*? Tickle us, do we not laugh? Prick us, do we not bleed? Wrong us, shall we not seek revenge? -- Voragh *On Behalf Of *Alan Anderson *Sent:* Thursday, November 17, 2016 1:13 PM On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Ed Bailey <bellerophon.modeler(a)gmail.com> wrote: bong QIn wa'DIch wa' mu' vIlIj. jIjatlhniS: {yavDaq QemjIq chenmoH *neH* 'e' DapIH, bImuj. Sor Hap 'echlet Sub veghlaH.} cha'logh «DapIH» DaghItlhta'. «-chugh» 'ut Hutlhlaw'. Leaving off {-chugh} seems to be a common error among advanced speakers of Klingon. I wonder if there's a linguistic theory that explains this phenomenon. -- ghunchu'wI' _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol(a)lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

1 0

Klingon Word of the Day: tlhoD
by qurgh＠wizage.net 17 Nov '16

17 Nov '16

Klingon Word of the Day for Thursday, November 17, 2016 Klingon word: tlhoD Part of speech: verb Definition: be somewhat obscured, filtered, smudged, fuzzy Source: qep'a' 23 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

2 1

Nine hours
by mayqel qunenoS 17 Nov '16

17 Nov '16

nIteb jIvummo', yaHwIjDaq vIpawmeH poH vIlo'bogh vIwuq. toH, motlh, Hutlogh Qoylu'pu'DI' yaHwIjDaq vIpaw. 'ach tera' poHvam vIlo'chugh vaj qaStaHvIS chorgh rep neH jIQonglaH. 'ach qen jIHvaD jatlh qunnoH: qunnoH, qoH SoH pagh qoHna' SoH.. yIngu' ! 'ej ghIq jatlhqa': qaStaHvIS DIS law', qaStaHvIS ram Hoch maQonglaHbe'; qaStaHvIS DIS law', maQongtaHvIS, ghumlu'.. toH, DaH, qatlh qaStaHvIS chorgh rep neH maQong ? ..qunnoH vIQoyDI', jInuD'eghchoH; jInuD'eghchoH 'ej wIvmeywIj vInuDchoH. 'ej ngugh vItna' vItlhoj.. lughbej qunnoH ! meqvammo', Hoch jaj wa'maHlogh Qoylu'pu'DI' yaHwIjDaq vIpaw. 'ej DaH, wIvvammo' qaStaHvIS Hut rep jIQonglaH. muSchu'taHghach luqotlh ghum.. 'e' wIQochbe' jIH qunnoH je.. ghum tI'nga' ! hahaha qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

1 0

Past events {-pu'} and {-DI'}
by mayqel qunenoS 17 Nov '16

17 Nov '16

If I want to write "yesterday as soon as we ate" then I would probably say {wa'Hu' maSoppu'DI'} If I want to write "four days ago as soon as I saw you" then I would probably write {loS Hu' qaleghpu'DI'} If I want to write "four months ago as soon as I hit you" then I would probably say {loS wen qaqIppu'DI'} If the above sentences are correct, then this means that when we talk about a past event which is described by the {-DI'}, then always the {-pu'} is appropriate. Or, to express the same question differently "is there a way for a past event, which is described by the {-DI'} not to be completed, thus not being able to take the {-pu'} ?" qunnoH jan puqloD

3 6

Klingon Word of the Day: tarDIghaD
by qurgh＠wizage.net 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

Klingon Word of the Day for Wednesday, November 16, 2016 Klingon word: tarDIghaD Part of speech: noun Definition: tardigrade Source: qepHom 2015 p.14 This Klingon Word of the Day is brought to you by qurgh (qurgh(a)kli.org)

4 6

Expressing "must"
by mayqel qunenoS 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

Something which during the 14 months I've been on this list, only once someone has mentioned is this: the {-nIS}, expresses "need"; it isn't equivalent with the english "must". if I write {jIQongnIS}, then this means "I need to sleep". I need to sleep because I am exhausted. Similarly {jISopnIS}, is "I need to eat"; I *need* to eat, because I'm starving. But what if I want to express "must" ? The must doesn't necessarily express "need". Mainly it expresses "obligation". Mainly it expresses "necessity". So, I thought that perhaps in order to express the "must", we could use the {'ut}. Example: "because you're a bad cat, I must tickle you" {vIghro' mIgh SoHmo' vIqotlh. 'ut.} However there is a problem. In the above example, while the english sentence describes a necessity to perform an action in the future (near or not so near), the klingon one doesn't. It says "because you're a bad cat I tickle you. it is necessary". So, in order to get the job done, we only need to place a {tugh} in the beginning, or any other appropriate time stamp and we're good to go. Perhaps by the appropriate context, and a well placed {'ut}, or maybe even {potlh}, or maybe even {net pIHbej}, or even better {net poQbej}, or even way better {jIHvaD net poQbej} we can express the "must", without falling into the trap of using {-nIS}. 'ach chaq jImuj. jIQongnISmo' jIQubchu'laHbe'. Do', muloStaH QongDaqwIj tun.. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

9 22

Can we have the {-be'} twice ?
by mayqel qunenoS 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

first go here: http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Type3VerbSuffixes there, at the -choH/change examples it says at the third row: {jIghelbe'choHlaHbe'}. so now I ask: can we use the {-be'} twice in the same word ? qunnoH jan puqloD

6 12

Highway at night
by mayqel qunenoS 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

povvam, Qu' vIta'nISmo' latlh vengDaq vIjaHnIS. meqvammo', qaStaHvIS ram javmaH qelI'qam vIlengta'. reH, ram leng vIparHa'. reH, qaStaHvIS ram puH DujwIj vI'ortaHchugh vaj muQuchlaH wanI'vam. 'ej nIteb jI'ortaHchugh vaj qaqbej. reH, Duj jonta' wab vIparHa', 'ej jotmo' Hoch Doch law' vIQublaH. pIj ram taw'a' rur yInmaj.. 'ej pa' ma'ortaHvIS, pIj ghochmaj wISovbe'. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

2 2

Expressing many centuries
by mayqel qunenoS 16 Nov '16

16 Nov '16

we have the {vatlh DIS poH} for "century"; but how do we say "many centuries" ? {vatlh law' DIS poH} or {vatlh DIS poH law'} ? and this question goes hand in hand with another question: can we apply the {law'} to numbers ? can we say for instance {'uy' law'} for "many millions" or {vatlh law'} for "many hundreds" ? qunnoH jan puqloD

2 3

What exactly does the {'ej} connect ?
by mayqel qunenoS 15 Nov '16

15 Nov '16

We know that the {'ej} is used, in order to join sentences. Now, at the risk of sounding like the village idiot, I will ask: What exactly is a sentence ? If I write: "while I was walking, I stepped on a cat", then that's a sentence. If I write: "while I was walking and while I was eating, I stepped on a cat", then that's a sentence too. But what exactly are the "while I was walking" and "while I was eating" on their own ? Are they sentences ? The reason I'm writing this is because I want to ask: Can we write: {jIyIttaHvIS 'ej jISoptaHvIS, vIghro' vIgho'} ? Or if the {jIyIttaHvIS} and {jISoptaHvIS} aren't sentences on their own, one cannot join them by the use of {'ej} ? qunnoH jan puqloD

5 13