tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 20 08:34:29 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC?: De'wI' mughghachmey (Computer Translations)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Tue, 20 Aug 1996 02:20:02 -0700
>From: "Kenneth Traft" <[email protected]>
Interesting! I had not seen "Homlet" before. I should probably comment on
SOME things; not like I whale on posts here, or like I did on the Hamlet
translation when I was editing it. Just a few things if I notice them.
>Marsellus: manajtlH ja' <HoreySo'> 'ej Dochvam moH HarQo' ghaH 'ach cha'logh
This I wonder about. I had read TKD that Klingon doesn't use indirect
quotes; there don't seem to be any examples, and Okrand specifically says
that verbs of saying have the thing said preceding or following the
narrative sentence. Shouldn't it be "<<SunajtaH>> ja' <HoreySo'>"?
(Horatio says "You are dreaming.")
>Benardo: loQ peba' 'ej qoghDu'lIj DIHevqa'. lut luQoyQo' qoghDu'lIj 'ach
>qaStaHvIS
> rammey Qov wIleghpu'. ram Qav chal yoS rap wovmoHmeH lengDaj
I've always felt funny about "ram Qav" for "last night." It sounds like
the night before the end of the world. "nungbogh ram," or better "wa'Hu'
ram." Erk, these are the kinds of corrections I shouldn't be doing; the
kinds of things I'd say to Nick and Guido.
> rInmoHta'DI' Hovvetlh. DaH meQbogh mIchDaq ratlhtaH. matay'
><marSeluS>
There's a verb missing in the sentence starting "ram Qav chal..." There's
a -meH clause and a -DI' clause, but no main verb. Is this colloquial
speech?
>Marsellus: roj! bIjatlh 'e' yImev! yIbej! naDev pawqa' 'oH.
> (Peace! Stop talking! Watch! It arrives here again.)
I thought that "Peace" for "silence" was an English idiom.
> pIj yIt qa'mey 'e' ja'lu'. ghojatlh! yImev 'ej yIjatlh! qa' yImev
><marSeluS>!
Why not "net ja'"?
>Horatio: 'ej vaj Haw'ta' 'ej qettaHbogh Doch DIv rur 'oH. Ha'! Homlet
>QupvaD'e'
How can you have -vaD and -'e' on the same word? They're both type-5
suffixes.
> ramvam qaSpu'bogh wanI'mey ghoja'moH. yInwIjDaq jI'Ip, nujatlhQo' qa'
>tam
> 'ach ghaHvaD jatlhrup 'oH. bangmajmo' Qu'majmo' je qa' gho'angmoH 'e'
> DagIb'a'?
"qa' gho'angmoH"... the spirit, show us! gho- is imperative with
first-person plural object. I don't understand how this can make any
sense. Is it a typo I missed? You made a lot, and I'm ignoring them when
I can.
A side-point... If he's sure the spirit can speak (and thus use language),
why isn't it a "ghaH" instead of an "'oH"?
Like I said, I'm not going to critique the whole thing (I had enough of
that with the one *we* did!) It was on the whole readable, but it had a
fair number of what looked like English-centric idiomatic usages to me
(qeylIS pongvaD, yIjatlh or something for "speak, in the name of Kahless";
yInwIjDaq jI'Ip for "I swear on my life"; these are idioms, with meanings
that are not plain from the simple meanings of the words). Anyway, it's
interesting to see another attempt.
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBMhnYO8ppGeTJXWZ9AQHY5AL+LmF9KtNr3VXFOME5b/06GHJ2YhpEwMwk
GkVKEz52POm01jfikYcGi0CV2UTgP9z3gwSHKCWGFWQlyMBpZH9Pj8tVAaZGBD+z
K1nwxm4LJa4om+/gJlofUvmLK+RACYXG
=g3y3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----