[tlhIngan-Hol] In the labyrinth of {-qu'} {-chu'} and {-Ha'}
'op ret, De'wI'maj jIH 'aqroSvo' DaqHom wIlelpu'. some time ago we wanted to remove a small area from the top of our computer's screen. wev rur DaqHomvetlh, 'ej De' Sar cha'. this area was a line, which displayed various information. Qu'vam wIchavmeH, De'wI' mIwvaD weQmoQnaQ wInuDta'. in order to achieve this task, we searched the web for a program. 'ej tagha' De'wI' mIwqoq wISamta'. and eventually a so-called program eventually we found. qatlh {De'wI' mIwqoq} why so-called ? la'laHbe'mo' ! because it was worthless ! De'wI'majvaD wIlo'ta'DI', QapHa'choH De'wI'maj.. as soon as we used it, our computer begun to malfunction.. De'wI'maj *library*Daq, ngIq ta - wa' ta neH - ghItlhHa'mo' De'wI' mIwqoqvam. because this pitiful excuse for a program, erased a single file - just a single file - at our computers library. tagha', QapHa'chu'pu' De'wI'maj.. finally, our computer crashed.. 'ej wItI'meH, wa'DIch qawHaqDaj wIghItlhHa'nIS and in order to repair it, its memory we needed to erase 'ej ghIq wIghunnISqa' and then we needed to reprogram it. why, am I writting these ? there are times, when seemingly insiginificant details one forgets, seriously mess him up. some time ago, I needed to write "I like a lot" ; so I take the verb {parHa'}, and think: "I will just add {-qu'}, and I'm good to go". But instantly, I though "wait a minute ; {-qu'} or {-chu'} ?" and to make things even worst, the even more dangerous question came to mind : "where do I place the {-qu'} or {-chu'} ? before or after the {-Ha'} ?" and this question followed too : "{-qu'} is rover ; if I place it after the {-Ha'}, won't I negate its effect ?" For a few days, these questions plagued me, and I felt the more I considered them, the deeper I was getting in a labyrinth, I could not get out of. Until -finally-, I was left with no choice, but to study again from the beginning the rovers, and the {-chu'} as well. And because I restudied them, I realized that most of these questions, were dead wrong, from the start. Since -Ha', according to tkd, always occurs after the verb, at the word {parHa'}, both -qu' and -chu' (if they are to be placed), they have to be placed after the -Ha'. Now, there is a difference between -qu' and -chu'. the -qu' is emphatic, whereas the -chu' means "clearly/perfectly". So, parHa'qu' means "I like very much', while parHa'chu' means "I perfectly like". If we wrote parHa'chu'qu', then the -qu' would emphasize the "perfectly", and if we wrote parHa'qu'chu' then this would mean "I very much like" with all the "I very much like" taking place to the degree of "perfectly". Also -Ha' isn't negated by the simultaneous presence of -qu' and/or -chu', because they don't have "the-same-yet-opposite-meanings". -Ha' expresses the "undo, do wrongly", while -qu' is an emphatic. And -chu' expresses the "to the perfect degree" So, finally I feel I managed to escape this labyrinth of confusion. At least I hope I did (and if I am wrong somewhere, then please do tell me) ; however it is impressive, how forgetting just a single fact, can throw off balance your entire understanding of things. cpt qunnoq
bIlughchu'qu'! Yes, the rule about -Ha' always coming immediately after the verb is tricky, since it is a rover that doesn't actually rove. There are definitely some theoretical shenanigans about suffixes that don't play well with each other, but I think that in 99% of cases there is no need to worry too much. What you say about -chu' and -qu' not being each other's opposites, but speaking to different things, is essential. -- Socialist Alternative <http://www.socialistalternative.org/> Klingon Language Institute <http://www.kli.org/> On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
'op ret, De'wI'maj jIH 'aqroSvo' DaqHom wIlelpu'. some time ago we wanted to remove a small area from the top of our computer's screen.
wev rur DaqHomvetlh, 'ej De' Sar cha'. this area was a line, which displayed various information.
Qu'vam wIchavmeH, De'wI' mIwvaD weQmoQnaQ wInuDta'. in order to achieve this task, we searched the web for a program.
'ej tagha' De'wI' mIwqoq wISamta'. and eventually a so-called program eventually we found.
qatlh {De'wI' mIwqoq} why so-called ?
la'laHbe'mo' ! because it was worthless !
De'wI'majvaD wIlo'ta'DI', QapHa'choH De'wI'maj.. as soon as we used it, our computer begun to malfunction..
De'wI'maj *library*Daq, ngIq ta - wa' ta neH - ghItlhHa'mo' De'wI' mIwqoqvam. because this pitiful excuse for a program, erased a single file - just a single file - at our computers library.
tagha', QapHa'chu'pu' De'wI'maj.. finally, our computer crashed..
'ej wItI'meH, wa'DIch qawHaqDaj wIghItlhHa'nIS and in order to repair it, its memory we needed to erase
'ej ghIq wIghunnISqa' and then we needed to reprogram it.
why, am I writting these ?
there are times, when seemingly insiginificant details one forgets, seriously mess him up.
some time ago, I needed to write "I like a lot" ; so I take the verb {parHa'}, and think: "I will just add {-qu'}, and I'm good to go". But instantly, I though "wait a minute ; {-qu'} or {-chu'} ?"
and to make things even worst, the even more dangerous question came to mind : "where do I place the {-qu'} or {-chu'} ? before or after the {-Ha'} ?"
and this question followed too : "{-qu'} is rover ; if I place it after the {-Ha'}, won't I negate its effect ?"
For a few days, these questions plagued me, and I felt the more I considered them, the deeper I was getting in a labyrinth, I could not get out of.
Until -finally-, I was left with no choice, but to study again from the beginning the rovers, and the {-chu'} as well.
And because I restudied them, I realized that most of these questions, were dead wrong, from the start.
Since -Ha', according to tkd, always occurs after the verb, at the word {parHa'}, both -qu' and -chu' (if they are to be placed), they have to be placed after the -Ha'.
Now, there is a difference between -qu' and -chu'. the -qu' is emphatic, whereas the -chu' means "clearly/perfectly". So, parHa'qu' means "I like very much', while parHa'chu' means "I perfectly like".
If we wrote parHa'chu'qu', then the -qu' would emphasize the "perfectly", and if we wrote parHa'qu'chu' then this would mean "I very much like" with all the "I very much like" taking place to the degree of "perfectly".
Also -Ha' isn't negated by the simultaneous presence of -qu' and/or -chu', because they don't have "the-same-yet-opposite-meanings". -Ha' expresses the "undo, do wrongly", while -qu' is an emphatic. And -chu' expresses the "to the perfect degree"
So, finally I feel I managed to escape this labyrinth of confusion. At least I hope I did (and if I am wrong somewhere, then please do tell me) ; however it is impressive, how forgetting just a single fact, can throw off balance your entire understanding of things.
cpt qunnoq _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
thank you 'arHa' ! On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 12:05 AM, John R. Harness <cartweel@gmail.com> wrote:
bIlughchu'qu'! Yes, the rule about -Ha' always coming immediately after the verb is tricky, since it is a rover that doesn't actually rove.
There are definitely some theoretical shenanigans about suffixes that don't play well with each other, but I think that in 99% of cases there is no need to worry too much. What you say about -chu' and -qu' not being each other's opposites, but speaking to different things, is essential.
--
Socialist Alternative Klingon Language Institute
On Sat, Jun 4, 2016 at 9:39 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
'op ret, De'wI'maj jIH 'aqroSvo' DaqHom wIlelpu'. some time ago we wanted to remove a small area from the top of our computer's screen.
wev rur DaqHomvetlh, 'ej De' Sar cha'. this area was a line, which displayed various information.
Qu'vam wIchavmeH, De'wI' mIwvaD weQmoQnaQ wInuDta'. in order to achieve this task, we searched the web for a program.
'ej tagha' De'wI' mIwqoq wISamta'. and eventually a so-called program eventually we found.
qatlh {De'wI' mIwqoq} why so-called ?
la'laHbe'mo' ! because it was worthless !
De'wI'majvaD wIlo'ta'DI', QapHa'choH De'wI'maj.. as soon as we used it, our computer begun to malfunction..
De'wI'maj *library*Daq, ngIq ta - wa' ta neH - ghItlhHa'mo' De'wI' mIwqoqvam. because this pitiful excuse for a program, erased a single file - just a single file - at our computers library.
tagha', QapHa'chu'pu' De'wI'maj.. finally, our computer crashed..
'ej wItI'meH, wa'DIch qawHaqDaj wIghItlhHa'nIS and in order to repair it, its memory we needed to erase
'ej ghIq wIghunnISqa' and then we needed to reprogram it.
why, am I writting these ?
there are times, when seemingly insiginificant details one forgets, seriously mess him up.
some time ago, I needed to write "I like a lot" ; so I take the verb {parHa'}, and think: "I will just add {-qu'}, and I'm good to go". But instantly, I though "wait a minute ; {-qu'} or {-chu'} ?"
and to make things even worst, the even more dangerous question came to mind : "where do I place the {-qu'} or {-chu'} ? before or after the {-Ha'} ?"
and this question followed too : "{-qu'} is rover ; if I place it after the {-Ha'}, won't I negate its effect ?"
For a few days, these questions plagued me, and I felt the more I considered them, the deeper I was getting in a labyrinth, I could not get out of.
Until -finally-, I was left with no choice, but to study again from the beginning the rovers, and the {-chu'} as well.
And because I restudied them, I realized that most of these questions, were dead wrong, from the start.
Since -Ha', according to tkd, always occurs after the verb, at the word {parHa'}, both -qu' and -chu' (if they are to be placed), they have to be placed after the -Ha'.
Now, there is a difference between -qu' and -chu'. the -qu' is emphatic, whereas the -chu' means "clearly/perfectly". So, parHa'qu' means "I like very much', while parHa'chu' means "I perfectly like".
If we wrote parHa'chu'qu', then the -qu' would emphasize the "perfectly", and if we wrote parHa'qu'chu' then this would mean "I very much like" with all the "I very much like" taking place to the degree of "perfectly".
Also -Ha' isn't negated by the simultaneous presence of -qu' and/or -chu', because they don't have "the-same-yet-opposite-meanings". -Ha' expresses the "undo, do wrongly", while -qu' is an emphatic. And -chu' expresses the "to the perfect degree"
So, finally I feel I managed to escape this labyrinth of confusion. At least I hope I did (and if I am wrong somewhere, then please do tell me) ; however it is impressive, how forgetting just a single fact, can throw off balance your entire understanding of things.
cpt qunnoq _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
participants (2)
-
John R. Harness -
mayqel qunenoS