tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 03 18:43:29 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: More Translations...

December 03, 1996 6:00 AM, jatlh De'vuch:

> K:	yuQvetlhDaq wIqughtaH.
> E:	We are cruising to the planet.

There is no object in this sentence.  {yuQvetlhDaq} is not the object, it is a 
location, and comes *before* the object, or verb if there is no object.  
Therefore, you need to choose a prefix which means "no object."

yuQvetlhDaq maqughtaH.

Note that {yuQvetlhDaq} actually means "to that planet."

I'm wondering if you made another mistake here.  Was it your intention to mean 
"We are cruising in the direction of that planet, but we really aren't 
concerned about getting there," or did you mean "We are cruising towards that 
planet, and it is our specified destination"?  Usually one would rather say 
the latter.  If this is the case, then you'd need to say

yuQvetlhDaq maqughlI'.

Reread TKD section 4.2.7 and decide for yourself which one you want.

> K:	DaSmeywIj jIQeyHa'nISmoH.
> E:	I need to loosen my boots.

This time, you used a "no object" prefix when there WAS one.  {DaSmeywIj} is 
the object.

DaSmeywIj vIQeyHa'nISmoH.

> K:	maQumchuqnIS.
> E:	We need to communicate (with one another).

Hmmm . . . does this not mean "We need to communicate each other"?  I'm not 
sure if I like it.  Then again, I can't think of another concise way to say 
it.  I'd probably go for the clumsy

jIHvaD bIQumnIS 'ej SoHvaD jIQumnIS.

> K:	rIp vImuv vIneH.
> E:	I want to join the council.

maj.

> K:	bIHeghqangbe'chugh, vaj yISapQo'.
> E:	Do not volunteer unless you are willing to die.

maj.

> K:	Su', qaH.
> E:	Ready, sir.

{Su'} does not mean "be ready," it means that the speak is about to give a 
command, or that the speaker is about to do something.  If you, speaking this 
line, are about to do something, and you wanted to alert your captain, this 
would be fine.  "Get ready, sir!"

If you're saying you're ready to do a particular thing, you need to specify 
the verb, and add {-rup}.  For example, if you're ready to transmit data, you 
would say {De' vIlabrup, qaH}. "I am ready to transmit the data, sir."

If you're saying that you've set up some piece of machinery, use the verb with 
{-beH}.  For example, if you have just repaired the cloaking device, and you 
wanted to inform your captain of this, you'd say {chu'beH So'wI', qaH} "The 
cloaking device is ready to activate, sir."

> K:	qepvam bItalahbe'.
> E:	You may not record this meeting.

You made a wee spelling boo-boo!

{ta} is a noun, meaning "record."  The *verb* meaning "record" is {qon}.

Finally, this sentence has an object, but you used a "no object" prefix (you 
using that table on TKD p. 33 right?).  The correct prefix is (Da-}

qepvam DaqonlaHbe'.

> K:	tIghmeylIj HIghojmoH.
> E:	Teach me your customs.

Here's another double-object problem.  charghwI', of course, would adore it, 
but I don't.  Here's why.

{HIghojmoH} means "teach me."  More literally according to the Klingon, it 
means "cause me to learn."  The subject is "you."  What's the object?  The 
object is "me."

But if {HIghojmoH} already has a subject and an object, then what part of 
speech is {tIghmeylIj}?  It doesn't have a place!  The way to avoid this 
problem is to remember that {ghojmoH} doesn't simply mean "teach," it means 
"cause to learn."

This is another sentence which must be expanded.  Here's one way:

tIghmeylIj vIHaD vIneH.  HIghojmoH.

> K:	mIvvetlh yItuQmoHQo'.
> E:	Don't put that helmet on.

Ugh.  This one is probably the worst of the lot.  The problem is similar to 
the one with {ghojmoH}.  There's an added complication.  The object of the 
English translation of {tuQmoH} "put on (clothes)" would be the piece of 
clothing.  The object of the English translation of {tuQHa'moH} "undress" 
could NOT be the clothing, it would have to be the person who is being 
undressed.  The negation of a verb seems to be changing its object!

Some might interpret this as evidence that words which are verbs with suffixes 
and which are extra entries in the dictionary are seperate words in their own 
right, and they work just like their English glosses.  I still don't buy it.  
My guess is that Okrand simply did a sloppy job explaining this.

In fact, I'm not even sure if {tuQ} is transitive!  {jItuQ} *could* mean, "I 
wear clothing," and that could be the end of it.  Still, I don't really 
believe this.  I shall examine your sentence with the assumption that {tuQ} is 
transitive, and the object is the article of clothing.  (And please take any 
further debate of this subject out of KLBC!)

mIvvetlh yItuQchoHQo'!
Don't start wearing that helmet!

Surely, this takes care of the "put on" idea, right?

> K:	ghoS vagh Dujmey, qaH.
> E:	Five vessels are approaching, sir.

This is grammatically correct, although you've lost the idea that this is 
happening continuously.  See the suffix {-lI'}.

ghoSlI' vagh Dujmey, qaH.

> K:	chovulmoHlaHbe'.
> E:	You cannot knock me out.

maj.  For added clarity, I might have said {chovulchoHmoHlaHbe'}.

> K:	wIH DevwI'ma'.
> E:	Our leader is ruthless.

maj.

> K:	DaH yIQ navwIj.
> E:	My paper is wet now.

maj.  chay' mu'tlheghmeyvam Da'ogh?

> K:	puqpu' yI'av.
> E:	Guard the children.

Almost.  When you've got a plural third person object, the correct imperative 
prefix is {tI-}.  {puqpu' tI'av}.

> K:	jI'oy'chugh, qaja'Qo'.  'oy'chaj lubep tlhInganpu'.  lutIv.
> E:	If I hurt, I won't tell you.  Klingons do not complain about their pain.  

> They enjoy it.

maj!  The only problem is that you forgot the {-be'} suffix on {bep}.

> K:	jIDubtaH 'e' vIQub.  DaQubbe'chugh, vaj qaSuvqang.  qaSuv vIneHbe', 'ach 
> batlhwIj vIHubnIS, 'ej vIHubbej.
> E:	I think that I am improving.  If you don't think so, then I'm willing to 
> fight (with) you.  I do not want to fight, but I must defend my honor, and I 

> will.

majQa'!  I'd make a couple of suggestions, though.  English speakers love to 
say "I think . . ."  In Klingon, this is done with the {-law'} suffix: 
{jIDublaw'taH}.

Instead of using {Qub} to say "If you don't think so," why don't you say 
{bIQochchugh}.

{jIDublaw'taH.  bIQochchugh, qaSuvqang.}

bIDubbej!  not batlhlIj vItIch.  qaSuvchugh, maSuvtaH 'e' wItIv!  qa' wIje'meH 
maSuv!  tlhIngan maH!

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 96925.5

Back to archive top level