I wonder whether the following are correct. wa' jaj maHegh Hoch one day we will all die wa' jaj maHegh HochHom one day most of us will die wa' jaj maHegh Hoch maH one day all we will die wa' jaj maHegh maH Hoch one day all of us will die wa' jaj maHegh HochHom maH one day we almost all will die wa' jaj maHegh maH HochHom one day most of us will die wa' jaj Hegh Hoch chaH one day all they will die wa' jaj Hegh chaH Hoch one day all of them will die wa' jaj Hegh HochHom chaH one day they almost all will die wa' jaj Hegh chaH HochHom one day most of them will die And I wonder whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} used as subjects of a verb with the prefix {ma-}. And whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} placed before, or after pronouns. qunnoq
I don't believe there are any examples of {Hoch}, {HochHom}, or other nouns used with either first- or second-person subject prefixes or with a pronoun. I don't think it's ever been ruled out either, and it might end up being correct to use {maHegh Hoch} or {maHegh Hoch maH} to mean "we all die" or "all of us die". But for now I'd try to rephrase the sentence. On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:38 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
I wonder whether the following are correct.
wa' jaj maHegh Hoch one day we will all die
wa' jaj maHegh HochHom one day most of us will die
wa' jaj maHegh Hoch maH one day all we will die
wa' jaj maHegh maH Hoch one day all of us will die
wa' jaj maHegh HochHom maH one day we almost all will die
wa' jaj maHegh maH HochHom one day most of us will die
wa' jaj Hegh Hoch chaH one day all they will die
wa' jaj Hegh chaH Hoch one day all of them will die
wa' jaj Hegh HochHom chaH one day they almost all will die
wa' jaj Hegh chaH HochHom one day most of them will die
And I wonder whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} used as subjects of a verb with the prefix {ma-}.
And whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} placed before, or after pronouns.
qunnoq
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 8/11/2017 1:38 PM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
I wonder whether the following are correct.
wa' jaj maHegh Hoch one day we will all die
wa' jaj maHegh HochHom one day most of us will die
wa' jaj maHegh Hoch maH one day all we will die
wa' jaj maHegh maH Hoch one day all of us will die
wa' jaj maHegh HochHom maH one day we almost all will die
wa' jaj maHegh maH HochHom one day most of us will die
wa' jaj Hegh Hoch chaH one day all they will die
wa' jaj Hegh chaH Hoch one day all of them will die
wa' jaj Hegh HochHom chaH one day they almost all will die
wa' jaj Hegh chaH HochHom one day most of them will die
And I wonder whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} used as subjects of a verb with the prefix {ma-}.
And whether there are canon examples of {Hoch} and/or {HochHom} placed before, or after pronouns.
People try to do these things all the time, because they're trying to reproduce the expressions used by English or some other language. But most of these violate the rule of *rom*, that verb prefixes must agree with subjects and objects. Yes, sometimes those rules are violated by Klingons under certain circumstances, but we humans should be making up our own circumstances. *wa' jaj maHegh Hoch*/ one day we will all die / *Hoch* is a third-person noun, not a first-person noun, so the verb prefix must agree with a third-person subject. Say either *wa' jaj maHegh*/one day we will die/ or *wa' jaj Hegh Hoch*/one day everyone will die./ This goes for *HochHom* variants too. While this is not positive evidence, I will point out that /paq'batlh/ has *naDev Sughompu' 'ej Qo'noS SuvwI'pu' Hem tlhIH qeylIS tIghmey'e' DaH tIQoy...* /Hear now, All of you here, Proud warriors of Kronos The ways of Kahless.../ The translator declined to say *Hoch tlhIH* or *tlhIH Hoch* for /all of you./ *wa' jaj maHegh Hoch maH/wa' jaj maHegh maH Hoch* /one day all we will die/ Assuming either of *Hoch maH* or *maH Hoch *is valid for /all of us/ (as opposed to /some of us/ or/none of us/), then this works. But I don't think we know that those are valid. Likewise with *HochHom* variants. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Am 11.08.2017 um 22:09 schrieb SuStel:
While this is not positive evidence, I will point out that /paq'batlh/ has
Add to this the phrase {yIlop. wa'leS chaq maHegh} "We may die tomorrow". This not positive evidence either, but in this case as well, the is no {Hoch} used. I believe that saying "all of us" is an english idiom, that cannot be translated directly. This phrase intensifies the "us" by adding "all". So I would suggest to add a suffix like {-chu'} or just repeat the verb: {tugh maHegh 'ej Heghbej Hoch} "Soon we're all gonna die" If you want to be dramatic, as in a crashing airplane, make it shorter: {Hegh Hoch!} "everyone (will) die" {maHeghbej!} "we'll certainly die" or the obvious use of pronouns for emphasis: {maHegh maH} "WE (will) die" -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
participants (4)
-
Lieven -
mayqel qunenoS -
nIqolay Q -
SuStel