'elaDya' Hol 'eSpanya' Hol je (Beginner's text and questions)
'elaDya' Hol lubopbogh QIn vIlaDpu' 'ej wanI' tlhaQ vIqawnIS. wa' ben *Rhodes* 'ambay wISuchpu' be'nalwI' jIH je. 'IHqu' 'ambay, bIQ'a' HeHmey Dun tu'lu', 'ach Dajqu'bogh vengmey tIQ tu'lu' je. DochHa'qu' nganDaj. DuSaQDaq 'elaDya' Hol tIQ vISaDpu', 'ach 'elaDya' Hol vur vIjatlhlaHbe'. Sep vISuchbogh Hol 'op mu'tlhegh vIghoj reH 'e' vInID, vaj mebpa'meyDaq Qe'meyDaq je jIvunmeH loQ 'elaDya' Hol vIjatlh. ghIq nom 'elaDya' Hol lujatlhchoH 'elaDya'ngan ('ej pagh vIyajlaHba'), 'elaDya'ngan jIH 'e' luHarmo'. qatlh? jIvalqu'mo'? ghobe'. pImqu' 'elaDya' Hol, 'eSpanya' Hol je, 'ach rurqu'chuq QIch wab Ho'DoSchaj. jum ngoDvam. 'elaDya'nganpu' rurqu' je 'eSpanya'nganpu'. jawbogh 'elaDya'nganpu' vI'IjDI', 'eSpanya' Hol vIyajlaHbe'bogh lujatlh rut 'e' vIHar. As usual, I would appreciate any help / correction in order to improve my Klingon. I also have four questions: 1. Is */Rhodes/ 'ambay* right or should I say *'ambay /Rhodes/*? That leads me to another question: How do appositions work in Klingon? 2. Should I say *rurchuqqu'* instead of *rurqu'chuq*? For me, *rurqu'chuq* makes more sense, since I don't want to emphasize the reciprocity, but the similarity. 3. What is exactly the difference between *'Ij* and *Qoy*? 4. In a structure like *rut 'e' vIHar*, is it possible to have other elements (for example a locative) before the *'e'*? Thank you!
On 9/16/2021 1:54 PM, luis.chaparro@web.de wrote:
'elaDya' Hol lubopbogh QIn vIlaDpu' 'ej wanI' tlhaQ vIqawnIS.
Daqaw*nIS*? qatlh?
wa' ben*Rhodes* 'ambay wISuchpu' be'nalwI' jIH je. 'IHqu' 'ambay, bIQ'a' HeHmey Dun tu'lu', 'ach Dajqu'bogh vengmey tIQ tu'lu' je. DochHa'qu' nganDaj.
DuSaQDaq 'elaDya' Hol tIQ vISaDpu',
vIHaDpu'?
'ach 'elaDya' Hol vur vIjatlhlaHbe'. Sep vISuchbogh Hol 'op mu'tlhegh vIghoj reH 'e' vInID, vaj mebpa'meyDaq Qe'meyDaq je jIvunmeH loQ 'elaDya' Hol vIjatlh. ghIq nom 'elaDya' Hol lujatlhchoH 'elaDya'ngan ('ej pagh vIyajlaHba'), 'elaDya'ngan jIH 'e' luHarmo'. qatlh? jIvalqu'mo'? ghobe'. pImqu' 'elaDya' Hol, 'eSpanya' Hol je, 'ach rurqu'chuq QIch wab Ho'DoSchaj. jum ngoDvam. 'elaDya'nganpu' rurqu' je 'eSpanya'nganpu'. jawbogh 'elaDya'nganpu' vI'IjDI', 'eSpanya' Hol vIyajlaHbe'bogh lujatlh rut 'e' vIHar.
As usual, I would appreciate any help / correction in order to improve my Klingon. I also have four questions:
1. Is */Rhodes/ 'ambay* right or should I say *'ambay/Rhodes/*? That leads me to another question: How do appositions work in Klingon?
We don't have any hard and fast rules for appositives in Klingon. Pretty much take your best guess. I think most of the place names we've seen take the form /Name Feature,/ so you'd be safe doing it that way. For instance, *ghevchoq Sep*/Gevchok region./
2. Should I say*rurchuqqu'* instead of *rurqu'chuq*? For me, *rurqu'chuq* makes more sense, since I don't want to emphasize the reciprocity, but the similarity.
Yes, say *rurqu'chuq* for that reason.
3. What is exactly the difference between *'Ij* and*Qoy*?
The difference is partly explained in /The Klingon Way:/ "The verb *Qoy* means /hear,/ not just /listen./ One must actually perceive and understand that which is being said." I take from this that *'Ij* implies an attempt to perceive sound, whether or not sound is perceived, while *Qoy* implies that sound is not only heard, but processed.
4. In a structure like*rut 'e' vIHar*, is it possible to have other elements (for example a locative) before the *'e'*?
Yes. In a sentence-as-object construction, each independent clause can apparently take its full complement of arguments. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Thank you SuStel and Lieven L. Litaer for your replies! SuStel:
'elaDya' Hol lubopbogh QIn vIlaDpu' 'ej wanI' tlhaQ vIqawnIS. Daqaw*nIS*? qatlh?
Well, I was probably thinking in Spanish. In Spanish we can say "I had to think about something" when a situation *makes* you think about it, you cannot avoid it. I guess *-nIS* only work with real need or obligation, so maybe *'ej jIHvaD wanI' tlhaQ luqawmoHpu'*? By the way, the *prefix trick* is also possible with verbs with *-moH*, right?
DuSaQDaq 'elaDya' Hol tIQ vISaDpu', vIHaDpu'?
Yes, I spelled that wrong, thank you!
On 9/16/2021 5:36 PM, luis.chaparro@web.de wrote:
By the way, the*prefix trick* is also possible with verbs with *-moH*, right?
Yes. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
By the way, the*prefix trick* is also possible with verbs with *-moH*, right?
Yes.
Ok! So another version of my first sentence could be: *'elaDya' Hol lubopbogh QIn vIlaDpu' 'ej wanI' tlhaQ muqawmoHpu'.* Actually, *mu-* could refer to it (*'elaDya' Hol*) or them (*QIn*), so I could add *bIH* at the end in order to clarify that I meant the messages, right? But this is my guess: In this context most people would likely understand that what I've read is what reminds me of something (and even if someone would refer it to the language instead of the messages, that wouldn't affect the understanding of the text). So I think the sentence is fine without *bIH*. Am I right? And sorry, but I have one more question about verbs with *-moH*. Are all this options right?: *tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *ghojwI' ghojmoH* *ghojwI'vaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *mughojmoH* (meaning *he/she/they teach/es me*) *jIHvaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *tlhIngan Hol mughojmoH* (with *prefix trick*) Thank you!
On 9/17/2021 6:43 AM, luis.chaparro@web.de wrote:
SuStel:
By the way, the*prefix trick* is also possible with verbs with *-moH*, right? Yes. Ok! So another version of my first sentence could be: *'elaDya' Hol lubopbogh QIn vIlaDpu' 'ej wanI' tlhaQ muqawmoHpu'.* Actually, *mu-* could refer to it (*'elaDya' Hol*) or them (*QIn*), so I could add *bIH* at the end in order to clarify that I meant the messages, right? But this is my guess: In this context most people would likely understand that what I've read is what reminds me of something (and even if someone would refer it to the language instead of the messages, that wouldn't affect the understanding of the text). So I think the sentence is fine without *bIH*. Am I right?
Yes, you can always include the pronoun if you want to be clear.
And sorry, but I have one more question about verbs with *-moH*. Are all this options right?:
*tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *ghojwI' ghojmoH* *ghojwI'vaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *mughojmoH* (meaning *he/she/they teach/es me*) *jIHvaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *tlhIngan Hol mughojmoH* (with *prefix trick*)
Yes, all of these appear to be grammatical. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
SuStel:
Yes, you can always include the pronoun if you want to be clear.
And sorry, but I have one more question about verbs with *-moH*. Are all this options right?:
*tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *ghojwI' ghojmoH* *ghojwI'vaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *mughojmoH* (meaning *he/she/they teach/es me*) *jIHvaD tlhIngan Hol ghojmoH* *tlhIngan Hol mughojmoH* (with *prefix trick*)
Yes, all of these appear to be grammatical.
Great! Thanks as always, SuStel, for your help!
Am 16.09.2021 um 19:54 schrieb luis.chaparro@web.de:
1. Is */Rhodes/ 'ambay* right or should I say *'ambay /Rhodes/*? That leads me to another question: How do appositions work in Klingon?
I would also suggest {Rhodes 'ambay}, based on canon examples. To find more on what we know on apposition, see the page on the wiki: http://klingon.wiki/En/Apposition By the way, did you know the wiki also has a Spanish section? Just go and translate the missing pages to Spanish, and you'll soon have all your questions answered! :-) http://klingon.wiki/Es/Portada -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.tlhInganHol.com
On 9/16/2021 3:38 PM, Lieven L. Litaer wrote:
To find more on what we know on apposition, see the page on the wiki: http://klingon.wiki/En/Apposition
I see that you have /just/ edited that page, so I'm not going to try any edits now, but the entire section there about "appositions on *-wI'* nouns" is wrong. It claims that phrases like *DIr QanwI' taS, wab labwI' jan,* and *QaDmoHwI' DIr* are examples of apposition because they clarify what kind of thing the *-wI'* noun is. That is not what apposition is. Apposition is when two proximate noun phrases provide /independent/ descriptions or names of a thing. *DIr QanwI' taS* does not mean /a skin protector, a solution;/ it means /a solution of the skin-protector type./ That is genitive and Klingon indicates the genitive through the noun-noun construction. It isn't apposition. *DIr QanwI' taS, wab labwI' jan,* and *QaDmoHwI' DIr* are all examples of the genitive noun-noun construction. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Am 16.09.2021 um 21:50 schrieb SuStel:
I see that you have /just/ edited that page, so I'm not going to try any edits now, but the entire section there about "appositions on *-wI'* nouns" is wrong.
I'm happy that you tell me this. I was always a bit confused about those words. That's why that page also says that "some noun-noun constructions with a verb+wI' noun appear to be appositions" - so they only "appear". I guess the page needs some refinement regarding that, using your explanation. I'm done finishing with my edits, so you are welcome to make corrections. That's what the wiki is made for: to collect our knowledge about everything we know about the Klingon language. (I really wish that more people would do that anyway.) -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.tlhInganHol.com http://klingon.wiki/En/Apposition
participants (3)
-
Lieven L. Litaer -
luis.chaparro＠web.de -
SuStel