tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 10 22:20:33 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: romuluSnganpu' tlhaQwI' (KLBC)

nyuD writes:
>romuluSnganpu' tlhaQwI' {a romulan joke | a joke with romulans}

{tlhaQwI'} suggests to me a funny *person*.  A joke is a funny *story* --
how about {lut tlhaQ}?

> This is KLBC stuff. (private reminder)
>
> I have been trying to do some
>German->English->Klingon translation,
> here are the results:

[Something is wrapping your notes at about column 40; it's hard to read.
I've reformatted the lines to make it easier for me.]

> romuluS'evnagh*TV show*Daq,       {At a subspace TV show on Romulus,}
> romuluSnganpu' yu'mey tlhobtaH.   {Romulans are asking questions.}

Please try to avoid running nouns together unless you can't make them
give you the meaning you want as seperate words.  It's more difficult
to isolate the root words from the suffixes when there are multiple
root words.

I'm uncomfortable using {-Daq} to translate "on a TV show".  I've tried
things like {[vay'] leghlu' *TV* much bejlu'taHvIS}.

The second line has some big problems.  {romuluSnganpu'} is the subject,
so it has to come after the verb.  The object is apparently "questions",
but {yu'} is a verb.  "Ask questions" is redundant anyway; "ask" all by
itself does a find job of conveying the meaning.  "Interrogate" might
work as well: {yu'taH romuluSnganpu'}.

> wa' romuluSngan yu':              {One romulan asks:}

The verb has to precede the subject, and I think {tlhob} is better here.
{yu'} seems to want the thing being interrogated as its object; {tlhob}
fits better as a verb of saying (with a sentence as its "object").
{tlhob wa' romuluSngan:}

> "nuq cha' *plus* cha'?"           {"What makes two and two?" (2+2)}

Where's the verb?  (I don't even want to get into Klingon arithmetic.)

> latlh romuluSngan jang:           {An other romulan answers:}
> "vagh!"                           {"Five!"}

Again, the subject has to *follow* the verb: {jang latlh}.  We've usually
used {latlh} after a noun to mean something like "another of the Romulans",
but in this case {latlh} alone carries the correct meaning.

> romuluSngan wa'Dich jang:         {The first romulan answers:}

You're consistently misplacing the subject before the verb.

> "Dap 'e'!"                        {"This is nonsense!"}

No, the pronoun {'e'} is *only* used as the *object* of a sentence.  You
can probably get away with just saying {Dap} "it is nonsense."

> latlhpu' poQ:                     {The others demand:}

(The subject needs to come last.)  Since the subject is plural but the
object is singular, the verb needs to have the {lu-} prefix.

> "latlhSuD yInob! latlhSuD yInob!" {"Give him another try!" (2x)}

Yecch.  {SuD} isn't a noun; you can't use it this way.  I'd restate the
sentence: {nIDqa' 'e' yIchaw'} "permit that he tries again".

> romuluSngan wa'Dich Qochbe' 'ej yu': {The first romulan agrees and asks:}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> "nuq cha' *times* cha'?"          {"What's two times two?" (2*2)}

Where's the verb?  (I still don't want to get into Klingon arithmetic.)

> latlh romuluSngan jang:           {The other romulan answers:}
> "vagh!"                           {"Five!"}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> romuluSngan wa'Dich jang:         {The first romulan answers:}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> "Dapna' jaj'!"                    {"This is definitely DAMNED NONSENSE!"}

It's spelled {jay'}... otherwise, this is okay.

> latlhpu' poQ:                     {The others demand:}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> "latlhSuD yInob! latlhSuD yInob!" {"Give him another try!" (2x)}

[Yecch... :-)]

> QIt romuluSngan wa'Dich Qochbe' 'ej yu':
>{Slowly, the first romulan agrees and asks:}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> "nuq cha' *times* cha' *plus* wa'?"  {"What's two times two and one?" (2*2+1)}

Where's the verb, etc.?  (I *still* don't want to discuss Klingon arithmetic.)

> latlh romuluSngan jang:           {the other romulan answers:}
> "vagh!"                           {"Five!"}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.)

> nom latlhpu' poQ:                 {Quickly, the others demand:}
> "latlhSuD yInob! latlhSuD yInob!" {"Give him another try!" (2x)}

(The subject needs to come after the verb.) [Yecch again... :-)]

> As usual, I am sure it says something like
> {"My first five questions to romulans were nonsense, because
>   they always quickly demanded 2:1 change on their answers."}
>
> Is there any slightest sign of a possibility to translate 1+1 to
> {wa' je wa'} ?

No, but *maybe* on a good day I'd accept {wa' wa' je}.  Remember, noun
conjunctions come after the nouns they are conjoining.

> Can we say {cha'cha'} for 2*2 (two times two, as 20 = cha'maH {two times
>ten}) ??

Absolutely not.  {maH} doesn't mean "ten"; it is a number-forming suffix that
needs to be attached to a "real" number.  Perhaps {cha' cha'mey} "two twos"?
But I don't want to discuss Klingon arithmetic.  We have no examples of it.

> lugh yIngIl! {Dare to correct}

You need to glue these two verbs together with some grammar.  Try something
like {bIlughmoHmeH yIngIl} "dare in order that you correct."

-- ghunchu'wI'               batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj

Back to archive top level