Extra-planetary translation project
MDriest 
Sun, 10 May 1998 14:07:59 -0400

Some questions...

>>So, to restate my tentative translation, with some progress made:
>>
>>G: Is something bothering you, Barf?
>>   qa en'[bo]xe[ther]       e[thing]  s'hi           lahe    barfa
>>   ?  it-bother-PROGRESSIVE something you-ACCUSATIVE PRESENT
>>Barf-VOCATIVE

>Two more bits of pickiness. [something] needs to get some kind of
>suffix to specify it as the the object doing the bothering to barfa.
>Or, the object of barfa's bothering feelings. Otherwise it looks a =

>little confusing as to which is the subject.

Well, just using my own feeling for grammar...
First of all, it's 'barf', not 'barfa'. The last one is a vocative.
It seems  that the 'it' is doing the the bothering and is therefore
subject of the sentence and takes a nominative. 'you' is the object
of the bothering, takes an accusative and should show that. Actually,
is does already. s'hi is an accusative. en' is therefore alone in the
sentence and is therefore automatically the subject. Let's say it has
a null-suffix to specify it as the subject. This happens in many language=
s.
Remember that if we now make up such a suffix, we will have to use it
in virtually all sentences. (i,e. th'klingof-suffix-je. Unncessary.)

I really don't understand why this e[thing] is necessary? I agree
we should have some specifications for words like thing. But why
not do the specification with it(an')? BTW, why did an' change to en'?
Why was 'thing' imported as a seperate word?

>[...]
>its klingoffwimic ahzahz s'[foofool]a

>its             klingoff-wimic                 =

>[minor premise] klingoff-[I identify myself as]

>ahzahz                  s' -[foofool]      -a
>[conclusion][intensive] you-fool[intensive]-[vocative]

>"(premise) I am klingon (and the rest is obvious), you fool!"

What is this -wimic? When we pull data from thin air, we need to
incorporate it in our project. OK, it's canon, but I feel that the =

Vulcan we hear on film is not that useful in all instances. For example,
the speech made by the high priestess in the beginning of ST:IV
contains many riddles, against-canon material and blatant errors.
I do not say we lose the -wimic. I merely point out it should fit
in with the rest we have.
There is a significant risk that we will develop fluent speakers of
Vulcan (or w~l'q'n if you like) who cannot understand a word of what
is said by the StarTrek-Vulcans. Paramount will never accept such
a language. (I doubt if they will in any case...)

BTW. Rob, I'd like to know just how this wonderous program exactly
works. Could you give us at least a broad overview of its wee bairns?

I changed the name of the posting. It seems more dignified.

Greetings to you all,


Sorahl cha'Sereth hei'T'Rahl.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Why would any Vulcan want to go to China anyway?=