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

Sat Apr 2 04:56:41 PDT 2016

You misunderstand me. You don't have to avoid complex concepts. You just have to avoid run-on sentences. Repackage your complex ideas into smaller sentences that fit together well. These smaller sentences can be quite elegant. 

Or, I could have said:

You misunderstand me in that I never intended to suggest that you avoid complex concepts in favor of a more limited context of ideas, but instead intended that you avoid run-on sentences by repackaging your complex ideas into smaller, more elegant sentences that fit together well. 

You should not avoid {'e'}, {-bogh}, {-meH}, or even {-ghach}. Just don't beat them to death in every sentence you create. This most recent message is of a different character that I find quite good. It represents a shift in style that I highly recommend. 

Sent from my iPad
lojmIt tI'wI' nuv

> On Apr 2, 2016, at 4:39 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol