[Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' cha'vatlh: toDmeH Qu'

[Qov]

At 10:17 '?????' 6/14/2012, you wrote:
>On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:46 PM, Qov <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
> > 200: toDmeH Qu'
>
>yapbe''a' <toD Qu'>?

maj. DIp vIlIjpu'. yap <toD>

> > mon Qa'bar. jatlh, "Mahoun DaQanlI'mo' choquvmoH. chay' DatoD 'e' DaHech?"
>
>QeHbe' Qa'bar. Quch. ghaHvaD Mahoun Qan 'eSSIm, chaq 'e' Qub Qa'bar.
>lugh 'eSSIm wIv 'e' 'ol. naD. tlhoS tlho'. QaHqang 'ej QaHrup. wo'
>'oSbejmo' Qa'bar, 'ej wo' toy'bejmo' 'eSSIm, DaH Qa'bar voqchu''a'
>'eSSIm?

vay' voqlaHchu''a' 'eSSIm? :-)

> > Mahoun nab QIj 'eSSIm. jatlh Qa'bar, "loS jaj loSnISbe'. DalelmeH nuq
> > DapoQ?"
>
>qechvaD yabwIjDaq Huj <lel> 'ach qay'qu'be'.

chaq nuv ghaHmo' Huj, 'ach vay' toDlu'taHvIS Doch bopbogh Hol'e' lo'lu'.

> > yabDajDaq 'aH yIrta'mo' 'eSSIm SIbI' per. nom lam bo'Degh, wovmoHwI',
>
>  <'ul Sech> pong TalkNow!

Daj. mu' chu'vetlh vISov. chIch vIlo'be'law'pu' 'ach DaH meq vIlIjpu'. vIchoH.

> > tlhegh, Sutmey je yIr Qa'bar. Mahoun Daq ngu' 'eSSIm 'ej ghorDaq Qol.
> >
> > yavDaq 'eSSIm, DIS DIn je So'taHmo' Duj So'wI',
>
>qIt'a'? Doj tlhIngan So'wI' cham.

yabwIjDaq Duj QIb ghovbe'meH jagh loQ Sach 'ay' So'lu'pu'bogh.

> > DIn poSmoHmeH bo'Dagh lo'laH
> > 'eSSIm. lam, botbogh naghmey je teqta'DI', 'och 'el. "maHun!" jatlh.
> > jangchugh Mahoun Qoybe' 'eSSIm.
>
>va, pab vIqelnISchoH.

qay'be'. Hoch vIqelqang.

>The grammar of this sentence bothers me. There's probably something
>involving subjunctive going on here, and I can't get Klingon to
>express that well at all. My reading of {jangchugh} treats it like
>formal logic and seems to imply that she will hear him only if he
>*doesn't* answer. Since it doesn't say {jangmo'} it does basically
>cover the desired meaning, but it still sits a little lopsided in my
>brain.
>
>If I were writing down the idea that you obviously intend, it would
>come out {jang Mahoun 'e' Qoybe' 'eSSIm}. I can see some people
>misunderstanding it as implying that he indeed answered, but I'd argue
>that interpretation is not supported by the sentence as object
>construction. At least not without a conjunction like {'ej} or {'ach}.

ghaytan vIqontaHvIS muSIgh DIvI' Hol. tlhIngan pab vIbuSnIS. vIchoH.

{jang'a' Mahoun? Qoybe' 'eSSIm.}

>jItlhIj. 'ach chaq DIvI' Hol vIlo'mo' jang latlh.

jImon.

> > wovmoHwI' chu' 'ej 'ochDaq ghoSchoH. Mahoun
> > pong jachqa' 'ach jangbe'taH. langHa'choHDI' 'och, torchoH ghIq QamchoH
> > 'eSSIm. Dat wovmoHwI' Qeq. DIn 'eS SoDlu'bogh nuDmeH 'uS lo'. Dach Mahoun.
>
>'eSSIm nejtaHvIS narghmeH 'och Samta''a'? ngemDaq So''eghtaH? 'ach
>teHchugh tu'pu' nejwI' noch 'ej De' Qoypu' Qa'bar.

'ej Dejpu' 'och'e' lo'pu'bogh 'eSSIm. chaq latlh tu'pu' ...

> > DIS HeHmey nuDchoH 'eSSIm. Qargh tu'lu'. chaq veghlaH Mahoun, 'ach qatlh?
> > pay' ngoD tlhoj 'eSSIm: loj Mahoun 'e' Har Qa'bar luneH Mahoun quchwI'pu'.
> > Samta'chugh QaS, Sambe'pu' 'e' maqba'.
>
>va, DuH. tlhoy val 'eSSIm 'e' vItul.

DuHmey DunHa' qellaHba'taH!

> > Mahoun lujoy'taHvIS tlhInganpu',
> > lunejtaHmo' Qa'bar 'eSSIm je, poH lunatlh neH.
> >
> > "chaloy!" jatlh 'eSSIm 'ej yavDaq ba'choH. DIS mejpu'mo' 'eSSIm, loDnalDaj
> > chu' HoHta'.
>
>qen Hegh bey jachta'. 'ut'a' latlh?

jISovbe'. lalDanlIjvaD bong Hegh tay cherchugh qorDu', SIbI' latlh lucher'a'?

> > "tujoy," jatlh Mahoun ghogh. DIS 'aqroSDaq ghaHtaH.
>
>lop! yIn bey jachlaH!

:-)

> > So'eghmeH, vagh DIS nagh
> > 'etlhmey jojDaq ghoD'eghta'. "qaghI--qajotHa'moH 'e' vIHechbe'. DISDaq
> > Hujmo' ghoghlIj QIblIj je qaghovbe'. nuqDaq wovmoHwI' DaSuqpu'?"
>
> > "munoj Qa'bar, yejquv DevwI'. chay' DatoSlaH rIQtaHvIS ghoplIj?" jatlh
> > 'eSSIm.
>
>Qa'bar pong ghov Mahoun 'e' Dabe'.

qawmoH pagh vuvmeH pagh loQ mIymeH per lo'.  <munob Barack Obama, 
President of the United States> rur.

> > "jItoSmeH 'ej naDev jIpol'eghmeH 'uSDu'wIj DubwIj je vIlo'.[286]
>
>mIw vIghov. DuSaQDaq QongmeH qach chob vItobmeH rurbogh mIw vIta'.
>Sumbe'mo' chob tlhoy'mey, jISIchmeH DeSDu'wI' vIlo'nIS je.

maj. SarlaH mIw.

> > DaH
> > jIghIrlI'," jatlh Mahoun. boQ 'eSSIm. tuQ'eghmoHmeH Mahoun boQ je. 'och
> > luveghtaHvIS 'eSSIm tlha' Mahoun. DeSqIvDu'Daq qIvDu'Daq je ghoS 'ej tugh
> > nargh. SaHtaH *Hov matlh*. Duj pIrmuSDaq tIn tlhIngan wo' Degh. jach Mahoun
> > 'ej 'och 'elqa' 'e' nID.
>
>jagh'a' tu' 'e' pIHbe'ba'. SuDHa'choH DIrDaj 'e' vISIv.

DaleghlaHlaw'.

> > "leS! mev! nuQaHlI'," jatlh 'eSSIm. "DaH wISo'lu'pu'. nuleghlaH pagh 'ej
> > nuHotlhlaH pagh."
> >
> > jatlh Mahoun, "vaj bIjatlhDI' <munoj Qa'bar yejquv DevwI'>, bIqIDbe''a'?"
>
>jIHagh. ghaytan poSqu' mInDu'Daj.
>
>But you've put the quoted sentence *inside* another, instead of having
>it precede or follow. Because "sentence" in TKD sometimes obviously
>applies to embedded clauses I can't say for sure whether that's legal
>or not, but I'd rearrange it with {vaj bIqIDbe''a'} coming first to
>avoid the issue.

yaj.

>DaH DIvI' Hol ghovmo' laD'a' vay'?

lut qelwI'pu' DaghommoHbe'. pab qelwI'pu' DaghommoH neH.

> > jatlh 'eSSIm, "qID 'oHbe'. bIQolrup'a'?"
>
>lengbogh nugh Qollu'. SeHlawDaq Qam QolwI'.
>Duj 'ellu'chugh, ghaytan <jol> lugh law' <Qol> lugh puS.

choHpu' vuDlIj. jItaghDI' bIjatlh Qol nuv 'ej nuv jollu'. jIQochpu' 
'ach jIghoH vIneHbe'mo' vIlaj. DaH qaStaHvIS cha'vatlh 'ay'mey mIw 
Dachuppu'bogh vIlo'taHmo' vIHubrup. DInvo' Qolrup.

> > 'ochDaq So'eghchu' Mahoun. jatlh, "ghobe' jay'. Qa'bar DevwI'vaD 
> chonob'a'?"
>
>Qumchu'mo' lImbe'law', 'ach Sotqu'ba'taH.

wej buQtaHmo' nuHmey QublaHtaH.

> > jatlh 'eSSIm, "ghobe', pIm ghu'. bIyajbe'. DuSovlaw'. DuQan neH." Mahoun
> > yongHa'moH 'e' nID 'eSSIm. 'om Mahoun 'ach wa' ghop lo'laHbe'mo'
> > DoHqu'laHbe'. DeSDaj QaQ 'uchqu'choH 'eSSIm
>
>loQ puj <QaQ> 'e' vIQub. yapHa'law'. chaq qaq <vaQ> <HoS> <pIv> <Sub> ghap.

vIyaj.

> > 'ej 'ochvo' Mahoun luH.
>
>"qatoDtaH jay', DaneHchugh pagh DaneHbe'chugh!"

:-)

> > wewchoH
> > muD qattaHvIS jol.
>
>Sumqu'mo' Duj QapHa'be'jaj jolvam'e'.

'ej nuptaH tatmey Qob.

- Qov