We know that we can use {latlhpu'} on its own, to say "others'. Example : Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH latlhpu' je. others are able to feed that animal too. Can we use the {Hoch} "on its own", in a similar way ? Would you accept the following ? Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal and an additional question just came to mind : Hochpu' can only mean "all people", or it can mean "everyone" as well (with the distinction between the two being made by the verb prefix of the preceding verb {je'}) ? mIv Hurgh qunnoq
On 6/23/2016 12:24 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
Would you accept the following ?
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal
No. *Hoch* doesn't mean /people,/ it means /all, everyone./ You can't pluralize that. "All alls?" -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
mayqel qunenoS :
We know that we can use {latlhpu'} on its own, to say "others'. Example :
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH latlhpu' je. others are able to feed that animal too.
Can we use the {Hoch} "on its own", in a similar way ? Would you accept the following ?
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal
and an additional question just came to mind : Hochpu' can only mean "all people", or it can mean "everyone" as well (with the distinction between the two being made by the verb prefix of the preceding verb {je'})?
What is the difference between "everyone" vs. "all people"? {Hoch} "everyone, all (of)" is already intrinsically plural (but grammatically singular). E.g.: may' ngeb tIv Hoch Everyone enjoys a mock battle. CK QI'tomerDaq Heghpu' Hoch No one survived Khitomer ("Everyone died at Khitomer"). TKW rut yIHmey ghom Hoch Everyone encounters tribbles occasionally. TKW tera' vatlh DIS poH cha'maH loS bIyIn jeSlaHpa' Hoch Be the first to journey to the 24th century. STX There are a few such intrinsically plural words in Klingon: {negh} soldiers (sg. {mang}) {cha} torpedoes (sg. {peng}) {chuyDaH} thrusters (sg. {vIj} {'eDSeHcha} take-off/landing thrusters (sg. unknown) {lolSeHcha} attitude-control thrusters (sg. unknown) On the other hand, {latlh} "additional one, other one, another one" is a normal noun, and can be pluralized: Heghpu'bogh latlhpu' ghuHmoH bey. ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI' maq. This yell ... serves to warn the other dead that a Klingon warrior is coming. S31 DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap. The rest I will grind beneath my boot. (STConst p.232) latlhpu' law' pIlmoHpu' lutvam [translation unavailable] PB In some ways {Hoch} could be considered a plural version of {vay'} "someone/anyone, something/anything" or {pagh} "no one, nothing". And like *{Hochpu'}, the forms *{vay'pu'} and *{paghpu'} have never been observed AFAIK. -- Voragh tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a' Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
mayqel qunenoS :
Can we use the {Hoch} "on its own", in a similar way? Would you accept the following?
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal
How would these be different in meaning from: Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH Hoch Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH HochHom In a pinch you could use {nuv} or {ghot} "person (humanoid)": Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hoch nuvpu' All of the people are able to feed that animal. Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHom ghotpu' Most of the people are able to feed that animal. And before you ask, we don't know the difference between the two. Both forms have been used: butlh ghajbogh nuv'e' yIHo' Admire the person with dirt under his fingernails. TKW ngIq nuv luHoH they killed the warriors one by one. ('U'-OPERA) nuv 'umHa' leghchugh veqlargh ngoS nuv 'umHa' Those unfit disintegrate at the glance of Fek'lhr PB quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB ngIq tonSaw' lo' SaD law' San chenmoH qeylIS wej boghbogh nuvpu' San chenmoH In one single move, Kahless decided the fate of thousands, and those to come. PB tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB jatlh 'e' mevDI' nuvpu' mejmoH ghaH ratlh be'nalDaj luqara' neH. After his last words, all were sent away, but his wife Lukara. PB vs. reH tay' ghot tuqDaj je One is always of his tribe. ("A person and his house are always together"). TKW ghotvam Ho'lu'. 'ej muSlu'. A man to admire... and hate. (ST5 notes) ghotpu' tamey Personnel Files STC wey jolpat: wa' (jav ghotpu') Personnel Transporter - 1 (6 Man) KBoP vaj ruS cher 'Iw rap cha' ghot HoS rap cha' ghot vuD chen yIn ruS So the bond was sealed in blood of two equal in body and thought, the bond of life. PB -- Voragh tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a' Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
voragh and SuStel, thank you for replying ; I wanted to find a way, in order to use {Hoch} on its own, without a noun needing to be "directly next to it or directly before it". I hadn't thought that it can be used on its own, without a suffix being attached to it, and for this reason I -erroneously- assumed that the only way to achieve that, was by adding the plural suffix {-pu'}. Luckily, after reading all those canon sentences (thank you Ca'non master !), I realized how one can use the {Hoch}/{HochHom} on its own. But, reading these canon sentences, I must comment the following :
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
I can't understand why the translation is given this way ; I'm only reading "people respect honor merely possess nothing"
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
Shouldn't the {quvmoHmeH} have the verb prefix {lu-} ? As I understand the translation of the klingon sentence, it goes "thousands of people followed him to the edge of the city, in order to honor him (THEY honor HIM), when/as soon as he would depart/departed. mop Hurgh On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
mayqel qunenoS :
Can we use the {Hoch} "on its own", in a similar way? Would you accept the following?
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal
How would these be different in meaning from:
Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH Hoch Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH HochHom
In a pinch you could use {nuv} or {ghot} "person (humanoid)":
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hoch nuvpu' All of the people are able to feed that animal.
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHom ghotpu' Most of the people are able to feed that animal.
And before you ask, we don't know the difference between the two. Both forms have been used:
butlh ghajbogh nuv'e' yIHo' Admire the person with dirt under his fingernails. TKW
ngIq nuv luHoH they killed the warriors one by one. ('U'-OPERA)
nuv 'umHa' leghchugh veqlargh ngoS nuv 'umHa' Those unfit disintegrate at the glance of Fek'lhr PB
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
ngIq tonSaw' lo' SaD law' San chenmoH qeylIS wej boghbogh nuvpu' San chenmoH In one single move, Kahless decided the fate of thousands, and those to come. PB
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
jatlh 'e' mevDI' nuvpu' mejmoH ghaH ratlh be'nalDaj luqara' neH. After his last words, all were sent away, but his wife Lukara. PB
vs.
reH tay' ghot tuqDaj je One is always of his tribe. ("A person and his house are always together"). TKW
ghotvam Ho'lu'. 'ej muSlu'. A man to admire... and hate. (ST5 notes)
ghotpu' tamey Personnel Files STC
wey jolpat: wa' (jav ghotpu') Personnel Transporter - 1 (6 Man) KBoP
vaj ruS cher 'Iw rap cha' ghot HoS rap cha' ghot vuD chen yIn ruS So the bond was sealed in blood of two equal in body and thought, the bond of life. PB
-- Voragh tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a' Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
voragh :
{Hoch} "everyone, all (of)" is already intrinsically plural (but grammatically singular).
this means that the {Hoch} is inherently plural, but it is used as being singular ? On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 10:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
voragh and SuStel, thank you for replying ;
I wanted to find a way, in order to use {Hoch} on its own, without a noun needing to be "directly next to it or directly before it".
I hadn't thought that it can be used on its own, without a suffix being attached to it, and for this reason I -erroneously- assumed that the only way to achieve that, was by adding the plural suffix {-pu'}.
Luckily, after reading all those canon sentences (thank you Ca'non master !), I realized how one can use the {Hoch}/{HochHom} on its own.
But, reading these canon sentences, I must comment the following :
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
I can't understand why the translation is given this way ; I'm only reading "people respect honor merely possess nothing"
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
Shouldn't the {quvmoHmeH} have the verb prefix {lu-} ? As I understand the translation of the klingon sentence, it goes "thousands of people followed him to the edge of the city, in order to honor him (THEY honor HIM), when/as soon as he would depart/departed.
mop Hurgh
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
mayqel qunenoS :
Can we use the {Hoch} "on its own", in a similar way? Would you accept the following?
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hochpu' all people are able to feed that animal
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHompu' almost all the people are able to feed that animal
How would these be different in meaning from:
Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH Hoch Ha'DIbaHvetlh je'laH HochHom
In a pinch you could use {nuv} or {ghot} "person (humanoid)":
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH Hoch nuvpu' All of the people are able to feed that animal.
Ha'DIbaHvetlh luje'laH HochHom ghotpu' Most of the people are able to feed that animal.
And before you ask, we don't know the difference between the two. Both forms have been used:
butlh ghajbogh nuv'e' yIHo' Admire the person with dirt under his fingernails. TKW
ngIq nuv luHoH they killed the warriors one by one. ('U'-OPERA)
nuv 'umHa' leghchugh veqlargh ngoS nuv 'umHa' Those unfit disintegrate at the glance of Fek'lhr PB
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
ngIq tonSaw' lo' SaD law' San chenmoH qeylIS wej boghbogh nuvpu' San chenmoH In one single move, Kahless decided the fate of thousands, and those to come. PB
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
jatlh 'e' mevDI' nuvpu' mejmoH ghaH ratlh be'nalDaj luqara' neH. After his last words, all were sent away, but his wife Lukara. PB
vs.
reH tay' ghot tuqDaj je One is always of his tribe. ("A person and his house are always together"). TKW
ghotvam Ho'lu'. 'ej muSlu'. A man to admire... and hate. (ST5 notes)
ghotpu' tamey Personnel Files STC
wey jolpat: wa' (jav ghotpu') Personnel Transporter - 1 (6 Man) KBoP
vaj ruS cher 'Iw rap cha' ghot HoS rap cha' ghot vuD chen yIn ruS So the bond was sealed in blood of two equal in body and thought, the bond of life. PB
-- Voragh tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a' Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 6/24/2016 3:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB I can't understand why the translation is given this way ; I'm only reading "people respect honor merely possess nothing"
It's either an error or artistic license. It should be *quv vuv pagh ghajbogh nuv neH.*
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB Shouldn't the {quvmoHmeH} have the verb prefix {lu-} ? As I understand the translation of the klingon sentence, it goes "thousands of people followed him to the edge of the city, in order to honor him (THEY honor HIM), when/as soon as he would depart/departed.
It's possible they are simply honoring /in general/ rather than honoring /him./ Otherwise, yes, that is an error. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
thanks ! On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 3:57 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 6/24/2016 3:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
I can't understand why the translation is given this way ; I'm only reading "people respect honor merely possess nothing"
It's either an error or artistic license. It should be quv vuv pagh ghajbogh nuv neH.
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
Shouldn't the {quvmoHmeH} have the verb prefix {lu-} ? As I understand the translation of the klingon sentence, it goes "thousands of people followed him to the edge of the city, in order to honor him (THEY honor HIM), when/as soon as he would depart/departed.
It's possible they are simply honoring in general rather than honoring him. Otherwise, yes, that is an error.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
I noitced that in the canon examples, the {Hoch} at the end describes beings capable of language. Can i safely assume, that depending on context, the {Hoch} could describe inanimate objects as well ? For example, in a passage where I'm talking about cars, can I say {muD QIH HochHom} for "almost all the cars damage the atmosphere" ? (without of course after the {HochHom} adding the {puH Dujmey}. mop Hurgh On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:35 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks !
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 3:57 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 6/24/2016 3:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
quv vuv nuv pagh ghajbogh neH Honor is for those with nothing to lose! PB
I can't understand why the translation is given this way ; I'm only reading "people respect honor merely possess nothing"
It's either an error or artistic license. It should be quv vuv pagh ghajbogh nuv neH.
tlheDDI' quvmoHmeH veng HeHDaq lutlha' SaD law' nuvpu' Thousands followed him to the edge of the city, to bid him farewell. PB
Shouldn't the {quvmoHmeH} have the verb prefix {lu-} ? As I understand the translation of the klingon sentence, it goes "thousands of people followed him to the edge of the city, in order to honor him (THEY honor HIM), when/as soon as he would depart/departed.
It's possible they are simply honoring in general rather than honoring him. Otherwise, yes, that is an error.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 6/24/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
Can i safely assume, that depending on context, the {Hoch} could describe inanimate objects as well ?
HIja'. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (3)
-
mayqel qunenoS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel