On 10/31/2016 9:25 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

lieven:

...

have you considered {Hochlogh}? it means something like "always", but literally says "each time" or "all times"

I had never thought about it ! I thought it meant "always", and I never took the time to analyze its literal meaning..

Now that you mentioned it, I realize it is perfect in order to convey the "each/every time meaning".

So, I will use {Hochlogh}, and we will all be happy ! qatlho' lieven !

*Hochlogh* is an emphatic alternative to *reH,* and *paghlogh* is an emphatic version of *not.***Use *reH* unless you're trying to be emphatic. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name

{Hochlogh} was introduced in KGT. AFAIK there is only one actual example sentence: (KGT 178): Similarly, when {-logh} is attached to {Hoch} (all), the resulting word, {Hochlogh} (all times), is used in the same way as {reH} (always), as in {Hochlogh no' yIquvmoH} (“All times honor your ancestors”...); compare {reH no' yIquvmoH} ({Always honor your ancestors”). It is similar to another emphatic form {paghlogh} “zero times: (KGT 178): "When {-logh} is attached to {pagh} (zero), the resulting form, {paghlogh} (zero times) is used as an emphatic alternate for {not} (never), as in {paghlogh jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'} (“a Klingon warrior surrenders zero times”)... compare {not jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'} (“a Klingon warrior never surrenders”). BTW both of these are considered {mu’mey ru’} “made-up (lit. “temporary”) words”: KGT 176: Sometimes words or phrases are coined for a specific occasion, intentionally violating grammatical rules in order to have an impact. Usually these are never heard again, though some gain currency and might as well be classified as slang. Klingon grammarians call such forms {mu'mey ru'} ("temporary words"). Sometimes, {mu'mey ru'} fill a void--that is, give voice to an idea for which there is no standard (or even slang) expression; sometimes, like slang, they are just more emphatic ways of expressing an idea. A common way to create these constructions is to bend the grammatical rules somewhat, violating the norm in a way that is so obvious that there is no question that it is being done intentionally. To do this is expressed in Klingon as {pabHa'} ("misfollow [the rules], follow [the rules] wrongly"). Do either of these appear in the paq’batlh? -- Voragh From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of mayqel qunenoS lieven:

have you considered {Hochlogh}? it means something like "always", but literally says "each time" or "all times"

qunnoH: And now, I would like to ask voragh on any canon examples, which utilize the {Hochlogh}.

Of course, as lieven pointed out, the difference -in english- between "each time" and "every time" eludes me. But the way they *feel* to me in english is the same with the way they feel to me in greek; that is whenever I hear them, I get the "emphasis" feeling. Because of this reason I feel that the {Hochlogh} actually manages to kill two birds with one stone. Literally it means "each/every time", while simultaneously it gives emphasis to the sentence. So, I believe it solves my problem of expressing the "each/every time" meaning. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 3:50 pm, "Steven Boozer" <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

{Hochlogh} was introduced in KGT. AFAIK there is only one actual example sentence:

(KGT 178): Similarly, when {-*logh}* is attached to {*Hoch}* (*all*), the resulting word, {*Hochlogh}* (*all times*), is used in the same way as {*reH}* (*always*), as in {*Hochlogh no' yIquvmoH}* (“*All times honor your ancestors”*...); compare {*reH no' yIquvmoH}* ({*Always honor your ancestors”*).

It is similar to another emphatic form {paghlogh} “zero times:

(KGT 178): "When {-*logh}* is attached to {*pagh}* (*zero*), the resulting form, {*paghlogh}* (*zero times*) is used as an emphatic alternate for {*not}* (*never*), as in {*paghlogh jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'}* (“*a Klingon warrior surrenders zero times”*)... compare {*not jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'}* (“*a Klingon warrior never surrenders”*).

BTW both of these are considered {mu’mey ru’} “made-up (lit. “temporary”) words”:

KGT 176: Sometimes words or phrases are coined for a specific occasion, intentionally violating grammatical rules in order to have an impact. Usually these are never heard again, though some gain currency and might as well be classified as slang. Klingon grammarians call such forms {*mu'mey ru'}* ("temporary words"). Sometimes, {*mu'mey ru'} *fill a void--that is, give voice to an idea for which there is no standard (or even slang) expression; sometimes, like slang, they are just more emphatic ways of expressing an idea. A common way to create these constructions is to bend the grammatical rules somewhat, violating the norm in a way that is so obvious that there is no question that it is being done intentionally. To do this is expressed in Klingon as {*pabHa'} *("misfollow [the rules], follow [the rules] wrongly").

Do either of these appear in the paq’batlh?

--

Voragh

*From:* tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org]

*On Behalf Of *mayqel qunenoS

lieven:

...

have you considered {Hochlogh}? it means something like "always", but literally says "each time" or "all times"

*qunnoH: * And now, I would like to ask voragh on any canon examples, which utilize the {Hochlogh}.

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

If it helps, think of them as emphatic colloquial *phrases* in English: Hochlogh each and every time, every single time paghlogh not even once, not a single time BTW if you have a good English-Greek dictionary that provides examples, look up the phrase “each and every”. -- Voragh From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of mayqel qunenoS And to further comment on the emphatic nature of "each/every" time, there is a reason why I feel them to be emphatic by nature. When you use them, you don't just refer to a group of things/events. You don't just put all these things/events in a big bag, handling them all as a homogenous group. By the "each/every" you're referring in particular to every single thing/event of that group, for whatever reason. And I think this is an emphatic approach by its very nature. If I say "at this list there is a group of klingonists" it is one thing. But if I say "at this list each one of us is a klingonist", then I believe the latter sentence puts the emphasis on every one here individually. qunnoH On 31 Oct 2016 4:01 pm, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com<mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote: Of course, as lieven pointed out, the difference -in english- between "each time" and "every time" eludes me. But the way they *feel* to me in english is the same with the way they feel to me in greek; that is whenever I hear them, I get the "emphasis" feeling. Because of this reason I feel that the {Hochlogh} actually manages to kill two birds with one stone. Literally it means "each/every time", while simultaneously it gives emphasis to the sentence. So, I believe it solves my problem of expressing the "each/every time" meaning. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 3:50 pm, "Steven Boozer" <sboozer@uchicago.edu<mailto:sboozer@uchicago.edu>> wrote: {Hochlogh} was introduced in KGT. AFAIK there is only one actual example sentence: (KGT 178): Similarly, when {-logh} is attached to {Hoch} (all), the resulting word, {Hochlogh} (all times), is used in the same way as {reH} (always), as in {Hochlogh no' yIquvmoH} (“All times honor your ancestors”...); compare {reH no' yIquvmoH} ({Always honor your ancestors”). It is similar to another emphatic form {paghlogh} “zero times: (KGT 178): "When {-logh} is attached to {pagh} (zero), the resulting form, {paghlogh} (zero times) is used as an emphatic alternate for {not} (never), as in {paghlogh jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'} (“a Klingon warrior surrenders zero times”)... compare {not jegh tlhIngan SuvwI'} (“a Klingon warrior never surrenders”). BTW both of these are considered {mu’mey ru’} “made-up (lit. “temporary”) words”: KGT 176: Sometimes words or phrases are coined for a specific occasion, intentionally violating grammatical rules in order to have an impact. Usually these are never heard again, though some gain currency and might as well be classified as slang. Klingon grammarians call such forms {mu'mey ru'} ("temporary words"). Sometimes, {mu'mey ru'} fill a void--that is, give voice to an idea for which there is no standard (or even slang) expression; sometimes, like slang, they are just more emphatic ways of expressing an idea. A common way to create these constructions is to bend the grammatical rules somewhat, violating the norm in a way that is so obvious that there is no question that it is being done intentionally. To do this is expressed in Klingon as {pabHa'} ("misfollow [the rules], follow [the rules] wrongly"). -- Voragh From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org<mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org>] On Behalf Of mayqel qunenoS lieven:

have you considered {Hochlogh}? it means something like "always", but literally says "each time" or "all times"

qunnoH: And now, I would like to ask voragh on any canon examples, which utilize the {Hochlogh}.

what is a run-on sentence ? qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 3:26 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

On 10/31/2016 4:58 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

{Hoch wanI' manga'chuq lurSa', be'etor jIH je, muchop} ? or maybe even: {Hoch poH manga'chuq lurSa', be'etor jIH je, muchop} ?

The problem is not the time stamp. The problem is that you've got a run-on sentence. *Hoch wanI' manga'chuq lurSa' be'etor jIH je* is a complete sentence, not a time stamp.

*reH manga'chuqDI' lurSa' be'etor jIH je, muchop*

-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

ok, I understand the concept of a run-on sentence, and I remember reading somewhere about the "emphatic" nature of {Hochlogh}. And it is this "emphatic" nature which initially made me identify its meaning with {reH} (I just thought it was the emphatic analogue of it). However, as lieven pointed out, if we analyze {Hochlogh} we will see that it possesses {Hoch} and {-logh}, which brings its "literal" meaning awfully close (in a good way), to "each/every time". So, why not use it in order to describe the "each time" concept ? {Hochlogh manga'chuq..} each/every time we have sex.. I don't see a way, through which any misunderstanding could arise. Even if the listener is "prejudiced" as soon as he hears the {Hochlogh} to understand "the emphatic alternative" of {reH}, then there is no problem since this is my intented meaning. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 3:33 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

On 10/31/2016 9:29 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

what is a run-on sentence ?

qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'

On 31 Oct 2016 3:26 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

...

On 10/31/2016 4:58 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

{Hoch wanI' manga'chuq lurSa', be'etor jIH je, muchop} ? or maybe even: {Hoch poH manga'chuq lurSa', be'etor jIH je, muchop} ?

The problem is not the time stamp. The problem is that you've got a run-on sentence. *Hoch wanI' manga'chuq lurSa' be'etor jIH je* is a complete sentence, not a time stamp.

*reH manga'chuqDI' lurSa' be'etor jIH je, muchop*

This is a run-on sentence, it is made up of two sentences ungrammatically turned into one.

-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

SuStel:

If you can't put *reH *in its place and get exactly the same meaning (with altered emphasis), you're not using it right.

Interesting point. However, because I fear we're being slowly led astray from the original subject (of this thread), I would like to say that I'm not searching for a way to say something like "each dog I tickle bites me". I'm (was) searching for a way to say "every time I tickle a dog, he bites me". Obviously {Hochlogh} can work perfectly for situations like the last one. qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 4:16 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

On 10/31/2016 9:50 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

However, as lieven pointed out, if we analyze {Hochlogh} we will see that it possesses {Hoch} and {-logh}, which brings its "literal" meaning awfully close (in a good way), to "each/every time".

So, why not use it in order to describe the "each time" concept ?

*-logh* doesn't mean "times"; it turns the number it's attached to into an adverbial meaning how many times something happens. *Hochlogh* refers to the number of times something happens (all the times!), not each individual instance. If you can't put *reH *in its place and get exactly the same meaning (with altered emphasis), you're not using it right.

-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

my point exactly ! qunnoH ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta' On 31 Oct 2016 4:32 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:

On 10/31/2016 10:26 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:

SuStel:

...

If you can't put *reH *in its place and get exactly the same meaning (with altered emphasis), you're not using it right.

Interesting point.

However, because I fear we're being slowly led astray from the original subject (of this thread), I would like to say that I'm not searching for a way to say something like "each dog I tickle bites me".

I'm (was) searching for a way to say "every time I tickle a dog, he bites me".

Obviously {Hochlogh} can work perfectly for situations like the last one.

Eh? Nobody brought up phrases like "each dog."

*reH **dog* * vIqotlhDI' muchop Hochlogh **dog** vIqotlhDI' muchop*

One substitutes for the other and the only difference is that the latter emphasizes the frequency at which it happens.

-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Christa Hansberry <chransberry@gmail.com> wrote:

I think the point here is that you have to have a suffix like -DI', or else you're saying something like, "I tickle a dog at all times; it bites me".

-QISta'

Right. In the English sentence "Every time I tickle a dog, it bites me," the phrase "every time" is being used like a subordinating conjunction. Klingon doesn't have subordinating conjunctions. It has Type 9 verb endings instead. Either use those, or use two sentences that make sense together, like {/dog/mey vIqotlh. reH muchop.} ~mIp'av