vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS. is this acceptable ? does it make sense ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
= I see more cats than birds. Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang. - André 2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further. SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS. what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com> wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
_______________________________________________ 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
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky." Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas." In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary. Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang. On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
if I wrote: SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS would this be correct ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky."
Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas."
In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary.
Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang.
On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS. On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
if I wrote:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS
would this be correct ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky."
Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas."
In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary.
Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang.
On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>> wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
ok, thanks. now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}.
SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS.
On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
if I wrote:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS
would this be correct ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky."
Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas."
In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary.
Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang.
On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
and something else: lets say I write: {vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 22 Nov 2016 6:03 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}.
SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS.
On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
if I wrote:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS
would this be correct ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky."
Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas."
In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary.
Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang.
On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <
mihkoun@gmail.com
<mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
HIja', lajlu'. On 11/22/2016 11:12 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
and something else:
lets say I write:
{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS}
is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 6:03 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote: > > No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. > > SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS. > > > On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> if I wrote: >> >> SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS >> >> would this be correct ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name> >> <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>>> wrote: >> >> "I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky." >> >> Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats >> that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and >> similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity >> exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an >> elephant in my pajamas." >> >> In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but >> unnecessary. >> >> Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is >> considered wordplay, not slang. >> >> On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further. >> >> SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' >> vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense >> ? is it >> grammatical ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>> >> >> wrote: >> >> = I see more cats than birds. >> >> Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is >> grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you >> could use >> {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang. >> >> - André >> >> >> 2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>>: >> >> >> vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> is this acceptable ? does it make sense ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
I got lost with the quotations. SuStel:
HIja', lajlu'.
this {HIja', lajlu'}, refers to the "{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?" On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:15 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
HIja', lajlu'.
On 11/22/2016 11:12 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
and something else:
lets say I write:
{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS}
is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 6:03 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote: > > No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. > > SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS. > > > On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> if I wrote: >> >> SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS >> >> would this be correct ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name> >> <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>>> wrote: >> >> "I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky." >> >> Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats >> that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and >> similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity >> exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an >> elephant in my pajamas." >> >> In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but >> unnecessary. >> >> Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is >> considered wordplay, not slang. >> >> On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further. >> >> SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' >> vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense >> ? is it >> grammatical ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>> >> >> wrote: >> >> = I see more cats than birds. >> >> Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is >> grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you >> could use >> {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang. >> >> - André >> >> >> 2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>>: >> >> >> vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> is this acceptable ? does it make sense ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Yes. {vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} means "the cats are fewer than the birds." On 11/22/2016 11:21 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
I got lost with the quotations.
SuStel:
HIja', lajlu'.
this {HIja', lajlu'}, refers to the "{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?"
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:15 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
HIja', lajlu'.
On 11/22/2016 11:12 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
and something else:
lets say I write:
{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS}
is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 6:03 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote: > > No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. > > SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS. > > > On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> if I wrote: >> >> SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS >> >> would this be correct ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name> >> <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>>> wrote: >> >> "I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky." >> >> Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats >> that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and >> similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity >> exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an >> elephant in my pajamas." >> >> In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but >> unnecessary. >> >> Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is >> considered wordplay, not slang. >> >> On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further. >> >> SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' >> vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense >> ? is it >> grammatical ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>> >> >> wrote: >> >> = I see more cats than birds. >> >> Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is >> grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you >> could use >> {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang. >> >> - André >> >> >> 2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>>: >> >> >> vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> is this acceptable ? does it make sense ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
jIH:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS SuStel No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}.
There is something here I don't understand. If we say {vIghro' law' law', bo'Degh law' puS}, then this means "the cats are more numerous than the birds". Why can't we just place a noun with a {-Daq} in front of the {vIghro'} and {bo'Degh}, with the sentence acquiring the meaning "at that place the cats are more, than the birds that are at that (the other place)" ? qunnoH On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:30 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
Yes. {vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} means "the cats are fewer than the birds."
On 11/22/2016 11:21 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
I got lost with the quotations.
SuStel:
HIja', lajlu'.
this {HIja', lajlu'}, refers to the "{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS} is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?"
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 6:15 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
HIja', lajlu'.
On 11/22/2016 11:12 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
and something else:
lets say I write:
{vIghro' puS law' bo'Degh puS puS}
is this acceptable for "the cats are less than the birds" ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 6:03 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote: > > No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. > > SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS. > > > On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> if I wrote: >> >> SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS >> >> would this be correct ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name> >> <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>>> wrote: >> >> "I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky." >> >> Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats >> that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and >> similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity >> exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an >> elephant in my pajamas." >> >> In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but >> unnecessary. >> >> Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is >> considered wordplay, not slang. >> >> On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote: >> >> maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further. >> >> SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' >> vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense >> ? is it >> grammatical ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' >> >> >> On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>> >> >> wrote: >> >> = I see more cats than birds. >> >> Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is >> grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you >> could use >> {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang. >> >> - André >> >> >> 2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> >> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>>: >> >> >> vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh >> law' puS. >> >> is this acceptable ? does it make sense ? >> >> qunnoH >> ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 11/23/2016 6:25 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
jIH:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS SuStel No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}. There is something here I don't understand.
If we say {vIghro' law' law', bo'Degh law' puS}, then this means "the cats are more numerous than the birds". Why can't we just place a noun with a {-Daq} in front of the {vIghro'} and {bo'Degh}, with the sentence acquiring the meaning "at that place the cats are more, than the birds that are at that (the other place)" ?
Because the comparative structure does not include nouns with *-Daq*. The structure is "A Q *law'* B Q *puS*," where A and B are noun phrases. Except for the specific changes given to us by Okrand, this structure is invariable. It is not "X*Daq* A Q *law'* Y*Daq* B Q *puS*." Now, noun phrases can include nouns with *-Daq.* For instance, *SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh*/cat which I see in a tree./ But **SorDaq vIghro'* is not a noun phrase. It does not mean /cat in a tree/ because the rules of noun-noun constructions do not allow us to put a type 5 noun suffix on any but the final noun. So if you want the individual parts of a comparative sentence to refer to different places, you're going to have to do so with noun phrases. These can be very sophisticated: *SorDaq bIHtaHbogh vIghro''e' law' law' chalDaq bIHtaHbogh bo'Degh'e' law' puS */there are more cats in the tree than birds in the sky/ Alternatively, depending on your emphasis, you can abandon the comparative construct altogether: *SorDaq law' vIghro'; chalDaq puS bo'Degh */there are many cats in the tree; there are few birds in the sky/* * There is**one exception to the invariability of the comparative construction that I can think of: *QamvIS Hegh QaQ law' torvIS yIn QaQ puS */Better to die on our feet than live on our knees./ (STVI and TKW) This sentence is a disaster on many levels, and Okrand even points out in TKW that it is ungrammatical, though he only discusses the *-vIS* lacking a *-taH.* But by all the rules we know, **QamtaHvIS Hegh* and **tortaHvIS yIn *are not real relative clauses. Can you insert *-vIS* clauses into the comparative formula like that? We don't know. Nothing backs this sentence up. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
because the rules of noun-noun constructions do not allow us to put a type 5 noun suffix on any but the final noun.
this is beautiful ! I would never have thought that the {SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS}, violates this rule. Somehow, I had the impression that at the {... law' ... puS} construction, the rules which govern the noun-noun relationship do not apply. Anyway, now I understand. thanks ! qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 23 Nov 2016 4:13 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 11/23/2016 6:25 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
jIH:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS
SuStel
No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}.
There is something here I don't understand.
If we say {vIghro' law' law', bo'Degh law' puS}, then this means "the cats are more numerous than the birds". Why can't we just place a noun with a {-Daq} in front of the {vIghro'} and {bo'Degh}, with the sentence acquiring the meaning "at that place the cats are more, than the birds that are at that (the other place)" ?
Because the comparative structure does not include nouns with *-Daq*.
The structure is "A Q *law'* B Q *puS*," where A and B are noun phrases. Except for the specific changes given to us by Okrand, this structure is invariable. It is not "X*Daq* A Q *law'* Y*Daq* B Q *puS*."
Now, noun phrases can include nouns with *-Daq.* For instance, *SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh** cat which I see in a tree.* But **SorDaq vIghro'* is not a noun phrase. It does not mean *cat in a tree* because the rules of noun-noun constructions do not allow us to put a type 5 noun suffix on any but the final noun.
So if you want the individual parts of a comparative sentence to refer to different places, you're going to have to do so with noun phrases. These can be very sophisticated:
*SorDaq bIHtaHbogh vIghro''e' law' law' chalDaq bIHtaHbogh bo'Degh'e' law' puS **there are more cats in the tree than birds in the sky*
Alternatively, depending on your emphasis, you can abandon the comparative construct altogether:
*SorDaq law' vIghro'; chalDaq puS bo'Degh **there are many cats in the tree; there are few birds in the sky*
There is one exception to the invariability of the comparative construction that I can think of:
*QamvIS Hegh QaQ law' torvIS yIn QaQ puS **Better to die on our feet than live on our knees.* (STVI and TKW)
This sentence is a disaster on many levels, and Okrand even points out in TKW that it is ungrammatical, though he only discusses the *-vIS* lacking a *-taH.* But by all the rules we know, **QamtaHvIS Hegh* and **tortaHvIS yIn *are not real relative clauses. Can you insert *-vIS* clauses into the comparative formula like that? We don't know. Nothing backs this sentence up.
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
KLINGON FOR THE GALACTIC TRAVELER (I'm reading from a Kindle app; I don't have a page number) tells us that a form of intentional ungrammaticality allows us to substitute various good/bad words for {law'} and {puS}. It's a long passage; I don't want to the whole thing here. You can say something like: SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' HoS chalDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' puj It means exactly the same thing as the standard form, but it's an acknowledged way of bending the rules. In various contexts it may or may not be considered appropriate language. You wouldn't use it in more formal contexts. On 11/22/2016 11:03 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
ok, thanks.
now, going back to andre's suggestion I would like to ask: how can the {HoS} and {puj} express the "more" and "less" cats/birds ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 5:20 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
No. You've left out the {vIleghbogh}.
SorDaq vIghro' vIleghbogh law' law' chalDaq bo'Degh vIleghbogh law' puS.
On 11/22/2016 10:18 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
if I wrote:
SorDaq vIghro' law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh law' puS
would this be correct ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:49 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name
<mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>
<mailto:sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>>> wrote:
"I see more cats in the tree than birds in the sky."
Perfectly understandable. One might question whether you see cats that are in a tree or you are in a tree when you see cats, and similarly for birds, but Okrand has said this sort of ambiguity exists in Klingon, and is comparable to English's "I shot an elephant in my pajamas."
In both your sentences so far, the {-'e'} has been allowed, but unnecessary.
Using words other than {law'} and {puS} in a comparison sentence is considered wordplay, not slang.
On 11/22/2016 9:35 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
maj ! so now, lets take this a bit further.
SorDaq vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', chalDaq bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
what do you think of this ? same questions: does it makes sense ? is it grammatical ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 22 Nov 2016 4:27 pm, "André Müller" <esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com> <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com <mailto:esperantist@gmail.com>>>>
wrote:
= I see more cats than birds.
Yes, I understand it and would say it makes sense and is grammatical. Because {law' law'} is a bit weird, maybe you could use {HoS} and {puj} instead, but that would be considered slang.
- André
2016-11-22 15:15 GMT+01:00 mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com> <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>>>>:
vIghro''e' vIleghbogh law' law', bo'Degh'e' vIleghbogh law' puS.
is this acceptable ? does it make sense ?
qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (3)
-
André Müller -
mayqel qunenoS -
SuStel