[Tlhingan-hol] 19 new words to create

Sat Jan 2 13:54:44 PST 2016

You seem to be having problems with translations that make sense to me. More below.

lojmIt tI’wI’ nuv ‘utlh
Door Repair Guy, Retired Honorably

> On Jan 2, 2016, at 1:12 PM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> qatlh DuHbe' ?
> 
> vuDwIj neH 'oH..
> it is only my personal opinion..
> 
> but enough about me ! lets talk about your sentences.
> 
> you wrote :
> 
> jIHbe'qu'chu' and vIjatlhlaHchu'be'qu'.
> 
> I hadn't thought that I could use both {-qu'} and {-chu'} at the same
> word ; so I'm happy to learn that I can. But I want to ask you, since
> this is something that confuses me..
> 
> the {-qu'} emphasizes only the preceding {-be'}, or the entire
> construction that precedes it ?

Either way, it seems to mean “I can very imperfectly speak.” and “It’s perfectly very much not me.” I guess it could be stretched to a slight variation in meaning, but that’s what it sounds like to me.

> you also wrote :
> 
> 'ach Hoch Holmeyvam'e' reH vay' chu' vIghojtaH.
> however all these languages always something new I'm learning.
> 
> I guess you were trying to say :
> however for all these languages I'm always learning something new.
> 
> but if my "smooth" translation is correct, shouldn't the {reH} come
> right after the {'ach} ?

While stylistically, I think you are right, SuStel often points out that there are certain words that belong at the “head” of the sentence, like time stamps, adverbials, purpose clauses — all the stuff that appears before the direct object. It’s not always obvious which ones need to precede each other. Even if this is a mistake, it’s an easy one to make, and I’m not immediately sure it’s mistake. If so, it’s a minor one. Nouns with Type 5 suffixes go at the head of the sentence.

The topic is “all these languages”. The sentence is, "I am always learning something new.”

> finally, the following sentence broke my heart, because while I was
> happy to understand all the previous sentences, I couldn't decipher
> this one.. ! lets read/analyze it together.
> 
> quqlaH cha' Hol ghojmeH mIwmey net Sov.
> are able to happen simultaneously, two languages (the subject of
> quqlaH) in order to learn. Then we have <procedures>, and as if all
> these weren't enough, we have a <one knows> too. That must be "the
> icing on the cake", as I believe you say in english, or "the cherry on
> the cake" as we say in greece.. hehehe

What I see here is a purpose clause applied to a noun. Literally, it’s “One knows that in-order-to-learn-two-languages methods can occur simultaneously.” I’m guessing the message means that it’s commonly known that one can use more than one method to learn two languages, and these methods can be used simultaneously.

> everything until ghojmeH has to refer/relate to ghojmeH. but how do I
> translate this ?
> <in order to be able to happen simultaneously the learning of two languages> ?
> <in order to learn two languages are able to happen simultaneously> ?

The {-meH} clause must precede what it describes. {quqlaH} precedes the {-meH} clause, so it can’t be applied to {quqlaH}. It has to apply to the noun {mIwmey} that follows it, which is the subject of {quqlaH}.

Often people forget that {-meH} clauses can describe the purpose of either nouns or verbs. In this case, it’s the noun, but you seem to be determined to interpret it as affecting the verb. Does this help?

> but then what is to follow ? the mIwmey ? if yes then that becomes..
> <in order to be able to happen simultaneously the learning of two
> languages the procedures>
> <in order to learn two languages are able to happen simultaneously the
> procedures> ?
> 
> but because we have the net Sov, I guess that the correct translation
> has to start with <one knows>.
> 
> So maybe..
> 
> one knows, that in order to be able to happen simultaneously the
> learning of two languages the procedures.
> one knows, that in order to learn two languages are able to happen
> simultaneously the procedures.
> 
> I can't figure this out !
> 
> qunnoq
> 
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 6:26 PM, Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> ghItlhpu' qunnoQ, jatlh:
>>> wa' Hol DaSovqu'meH, mu'tay'Daj pabDaj je Daqawchu'nIS.
>>> HolmeyvamvaD laHvam Daghajbej'a' ? esperanto Hol, toki pona Hol, lojban
>>> Hol je ?
>> 
>> qatlh DuHbe'? Holmeyvam jatlh neH 'e' ja' QISta'. jatlhchu' 'e' ja'be'qu'.
>> jIH'e', jav Holmey vIjatlh jIH: DIvI' Hol, tlhIngan Hol, turIqya' Hol, vIraS
>> Hol, 'eSpanya' Hol, Ubykh Hol je. 'ach jav Holvam'e' po'wI' jIH'a'? ghobe',
>> po'wI' jIHbe'qu'chu'! 'op Holmeyvam vIjatlhlaHqu' 'ej jIpo'. 'op Holmeyvam
>> vIjatlhlaHchu'be'qu' 'ej jIpo'Ha'. 'ach Hoch Holmeyvam'e' reH vay' chu'
>> vIghojtaH. quqlaH cha' Hol ghojmeH mIwmey net Sov.
>> 
>> QeS 'utlh
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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