[Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh cha'maH chorgh: <pegh Hoch>

[ghunchu'wI' 'utlh]

2012/1/23 Robyn Stewart <robyn at flyingstart.ca>:
>>> "DutoDta' 'e' DaHarDI' Dujon.”
>> "As soon as you believe she's fooled you, she's got you." jImIStaH.
>
> toD DalaDHa'pu'. toj Daqel. qaq'a'?

reH latlh qabDaq qul tuj law' Hoch tuj puS. mu' lugh vIlaDDI' ngabchu' Seng.

>>> jatlh, “mu'meywIj tob neH, HoD. not mumevqa' bIj."
>>
>> nuqjatlh? "It just proves my words, Captain. Punishment will never
>> again stop me."
>
> That is precisely as I would have translated it. I warned you that the Hota'ro' situation would get murkier before it got clearer. I can't look at the original while editing this, so if the problem is which words it proves, I'll check that after sending this. I could have put a line in the wrong place while editing.

The problem is the second sentence: "Punishment will never again stop
me." I don't see how it fits the situation, either now or when she
first served under qImyal.

>>> not Qu' naQ nguvmoHta' ta'Hom nub.
>>
>> "A suspect bit of deed never paints a complete mission." I fear I've
>> totally lost the groove on this installment.
>
> Other than the aspect suffix, that's again what I intended. Hota'ro' asked him to identify any dishonourable missions he had taken part in. Maybe you don't like the metaphor of causing to be dyed for changing the character of, contaminating, colouring, staining. He has committed minor misdeeds that one might say were not the epitome of honour, but none that made the whole mission so.

I like the metaphor fine. I think I was just disoriented by my ongoing
lack of comprehension and didn't recognize it as metaphor. If I had
chosen to translate it as "color" or "stain" instead of "paint", it
likely would have clicked.

>>> jatlh Hota'ro', “DughelDI' Sa', yIyevQo'. ”
>>
>> qatlh potlh yevQo'ghach? nuq ta'nIStaH HoD gheltaHvIS Sa'?
>
> SIbI' jangnIS. yevDI' DIvlaw' pagh neplaw' 'e' Har Hota'ro'.

yaj.

>> vay' peghchugh vajar HoD, peghchu'. peghDaj Sovbe' vabDot ghaH'e'.
>
> :-)

I think I overreached by putting {vabDot} where I did. {je} in its
place would work too.

>> I don't think
>> {-lI'} fits on {wa'DIch}, even if {yaS wa'DIch} is usually a single
>> idea.
>
> But we can put noun suffixes on wejDIch as in qrp'a' wejDIch. It looks righter to me now than it did when I wrote that footnote, but I'm on a bus.

You're thinking specifically of Type 5 suffixes, I think. Those go on
the "adjective" following a noun. Other suffixes stay on the noun.

-- ghunchu'wI'