tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 19 10:34:12 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: KLBC: A few test phrases



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>Date: Fri, 16 Aug 1996 18:42:14 -0700
>From: "Perry J. Brulotte" <[email protected]>

>I'm trying out a few phrases I tried to translate today.  Any comments?

>Dujrajmey lubavtaH Dujmajmey.
>*Our ships are orbiting your ships.*

"-mey" is a type 2 noun suffix, and "-raj"/"-maj" are type 4 noun
suffixes.  It should be "Dujmeyraj lubavtqaH Dujmeymaj."  Other than
misordering the suffixes, these look good.

>mInDu'lIj vIleghlaHbe'.
>*I cannot see your eyes.*

Fine.

>qabwIj Dalegh'a'?
>*Can you see my face?*

Also fine.  The "can" in English is not a terribly significant marker of
meaning; "Do you see my face?" is practically the same thing.  You could
have done "qabwIj DaleghlaH'a'?" but I don't miss the missing -laH.

>qatlh chobechmoHtaH?
>*Why do you make me suffer?*

Yes.

>pagh batlh Daghajbe'.
>*You have no honor.*

This is more like "You don't have no honor."  Evidence suggests that
Klingon doesn't do double-negatives, as English doesn't ("naDev vay'
vISovbe'" from CK).  "pagh batlh Daghaj" is OK (you have zero honor), but
"batlh Daghajbe'" sounds a little nicer to my ear (you do not have honor).
We also have "batlh DaHutlh", using the new word "Hutlh"/"lack" from TKW. 

>begh yIcu'!
>*Activate deflectors!*

"yIchu'"; otherwise correct.  It's "yI-" (as you have it) and not "tI-"
because "begh" is an irregular plural that's treated as singular.

>beHlIj HInob.
>*Give me your rifle.*

Correct.  This is a little counter-intuitive, since it should probably be
"jIHvaD beHlIj yInob," but we have evidence of this construction in
"ro'qegh'Iqchab HInob."

>Bear in mind that I did all of this without looking to first see if it had
>already been translated in TKW or TKD.  Any input/clarification is greatly
>appreciated.  I will soon be sending for the postal course, but want to try
>out tlhIngan Hol a little first to see if I can pick it up.

Sounds like you did just about everything right.

~mark

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface

iQB1AwUBMhihvsppGeTJXWZ9AQHtdgL8DI7OypDN8PVkFkdUZ2310t/l9eI5bL8T
HD77PtdpD/K8rQHrHQl6gclmYHFrotBX0e2MO1mJ56w2sOrWm3seAZbYNY82SEzO
pRVBvPDXWAfC08DFM/Yoh5l4j3fQ/k5c
=5dCY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Back to archive top level