[Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: boH

Sat Apr 2 01:39:33 PDT 2016

lojmIt tI'wI' nuv, thank you for your comments.

> {net DaSovlu’} is a mistake. The {-lu’} means that the
> second person in {Da-} is the object of the verb, but you
> are also trying to use {net} as the object of the verb.

Yes, of course.. this occured because I thought that {Sov} meant "to
inform"  ; I thought I remembered correctly, so I didn't look it up
before writing it.

> Basically, I think you overuse {‘e’} and {net}, trying hard to build long, complex Klingon sentences.

actually no.. the last thing I'm trying to do, is intentionally trying
to build long or complex klingon sentences. What I am trying to do
though, is excercise my ability to express in klingon the concepts I
want to express. Maybe there are times, when this results in more
complex sentences. However this complexity is not the goal.

> Very early on, Okrand discouraged us from this by explaining
> that Klingons often break up what an English speaker would pack
> into one sentence to form multiple sentences.

This is very interesting indeed ; and I appreciate mostly your sharing
all this information, a' this brings up the problem..

If someone refrains from {'e'}, {-bogh}, {ghach}, if someone limits
himself to sentences which contain one-two verbs max, if someone
demonizes complexity and condemns it altogether, then what kind of
meanings will he be able to express ? what kind of meanings wil he be
able to convey ?

so I believe that..

Hapvam wInuDmeH ghelmeH mu'tlheghvam maghel'eghnIS :
in order to examine this matter, we need to ask ourselves this question :

qatlh tlhIngan Hol ghoj vay' ?
why someone learns klingon ?

qech nap neH luDellaHmeH thlIngan Hol ghojchugh vay' vaj mu'tlhegh
Qatlh 'e' junnIS.
if someone learns klingon in order to be able to express only simple
concepts, then he needs to avoid complex sentences.

'a Hoch qechmey luDellaH neHchugh vaj mu'tlhegh Qatlh luqonnISlaH je.
but if someone wants to be able to express all concepts, then he needs
to be able to compose complex sentences too.

tlhIngan Hol wIghojmeH nupIlmoHbogh meqmaj DIghaj.
we all possess our reasons which motivate us in order to learn klingon.

meqwIj vIghaj je ; 'ej wa' meq neH vI'anglaHbe' bogh vIghaj.
I have my reasons too ; and I have a personal reason which I am unable
to reveal.

meqmo' mu'tlhegh Qatlh vIghItlhnISlaH je.
because of this reason, I need to be able to write complex sentences too.

*qanon*vo' ghoSbogh He'e' vIwuqba' rIntaH DaH 'e' vItlhoj.
now, I realize that I adopted a course which obviously strays away from canon.

meqmo' vIDelpu'bogh 'ej *qanon* bop tetlhvammo', jaj mu' mu'tlhegh
vIghItlh 'e' vImev.
because of this reason, and because this list is about canon, I will
stop writing sentences with the word of the day.

jIHvaD Hoch De'mey boghojmoHta'mo', Satlho' 'ej thlIHvaD tlho' vIyInqu'.
Thank you all for everything you taught me. I am really grateful.

mayqel mIv Hurgh qunnoq
I will remember this dinner forever

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 11:17 PM, lojmIttI'wI'nuv
<lojmitti7wi7nuv at gmail.com> wrote:
> bIngDaq jIghItlh…
>
> pItlh
> lojmIt tI'wI'nuv
>
>
>
> On Apr 1, 2016, at 11:42 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> loD boHqu' ghaH Qang'e' 'op ret net DaSovlu’…
>
>
> {net DaSovlu’} is a mistake. The {-lu’} means that the second person in
> {Da-} is the object of the verb, but you are also trying to use {net} as the
> object of the verb. This doesn’t work. {DaSovlu’} means “One knows you,” or
> “You are known.” There’s no grammatical spot left for {net}. This is not one
> of those “ditransitive” settings in Klingon grammar. The prefix trick
> doesn’t work here with {-lu’}, since {-lu’} is already twisting what the
> prefix means.
>
> If it could be done, it would wind up being the equivalent of {SoHvaD net
> Sovlu’}. “One knows it for your benefit,” or “One knows it to you.” Think
> {chab Danoblu’}, which is the equivalent of {SoHvaD chab noblu’}. I don’t
> think this is what you intended.
>
> Basically, I think you overuse {‘e’} and {net}, trying hard to build long,
> complex Klingon sentences. Very early on, Okrand discouraged us from this by
> explaining that Klingons often break up what an English speaker would pack
> into one sentence to form multiple sentences. It is really uncharacteristic
> of the language to try to pack so much into one sentence.
>
> It’s not wrong to use {‘e’}, but there is such a thing as using it too
> often. In Klingon, a sentence is a sentence, and every now and then, you can
> use one as a direct object of another sentence, but if more than one out of
> ten of your sentences is using {‘e’}, then you should stop and think about
> this.
>
> Look at extended works in canon or the stories that Qov has written or at
> Hamlet or ghIlghameS and see how often they use {‘e’}.
>
> There are a lot of tools in Klingon grammar. Use all of them. Don’t overuse
> a couple of them.
>
> When I started, everyone was overusing {-ghach}. Once that fad passed, they
> started overusing {-bogh}. {‘e’} is also a favorite because each of these
> satisfies the urge to show off how you can build a really long, complex
> sentence in Klingon.
>
> Meanwhile, for a skilled speaker of the language, this is not a goal.
>
> I don’t think that I’m going too far out on a limb to suggest that more
> skilled Klingonists generally try for two goals:
>
> 1. To write things in Klingon that are easy to understand. This encourages
> shorter sentences, and the skill to know how to put short sentences near
> each other in a way that makes meaning clear.
>
> 2. To write things with a precise meaning (or a humorously or usefully
> ambiguous meaning). There’s something really sweet in coming up with exactly
> the right affixes to make a word mean exactly what you want it to mean.
>
> It’s more common to have a few, large words rather than a long, complex
> combination of lots of words.
>
> Now and then, it’s okay to write a long sentence, but I suspect this is what
> SuStel was getting at when he chose the word “loquacious”.
>
> a' Duj luneHpu'bogh DaHIj
> 'e' DamIm 'e' DawIv. meqmo' DabIjqu'lu’.
>
>
> "But you choose that you delay that you deliver the ship which THEY had
> wanted." Your English translation says “HE” wanted.
>
> Again, you overuse {‘e’}. Stringing two of them together may seem very
> natural in English, but in Klingon, it is odd. On rare occasions, it might
> work fine, but I get the sense that to you, this is just how one speaks
> Klingon. You should consider backing off on that for a bit in order to
> exercise other tools of grammar. Give this one a rest.
>
> you have been informed that the chancellor is a very impatient man,
> still you chose to delay that you deliver the vessels he requested.
> for that reason, you will be severely punished.
>
>
> Note that even in English, you are overpacking sentences. Your first comma
> should arguably have been a period.
>
> Here’s how I’d do it.
>
> boHqu’bej Qang. nom SoHvo’ Duj pIHpu’, ‘ach bImIm. DubelHa’mo’ vIbIjqu’.
>
> No sense pussy-footing about who will do the punishing… If I was not in the
> position of dealing out the punishment, I would not likely be talking about
> this to you. A Klingon doesn’t whine about someone not performing well. He
> gets in that person’s face and directly addresses the topic as specifically
> and effectively as he can. "The chancellor is definitely impatient. He
> expected a ship from you promptly, but you delayed. I will punish you a lot
> for displeasing him.”
>
> There are no twists in the grammar to get lost in. Each piece is crisp and
> clear. I thought through the sequence of the sentences in Klingon as I would
> have though through phrases in a longer sentence in English. It’s a
> different thought process.
>
> Most Klingon sentences have one or two verbs. If you find yourself packing
> three or four or five verbs in one sentence, stop yourself and reconsider.
> Packing lots of verbs in one sentence is not a highly valued skill in
> Klingon. It’s tantamount to keeping dramatically clean fingernails.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>