tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 05 11:12:53 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: bIchuSchoHqu''a'
On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, William H. Martin wrote:
> jIjatlhchugh 'ach tIqwIjDaq lalDanwIj qechmey vIlajchu'be'chugh
> vaj ramqu' mu'meywIj. chuStaH neH ghoghwIj. ghIlob ghew vIDa.
This isn't bad - though I'll stick to my version (if only out of
cussedness).
> The only way I can translate this sort of thing is to peel away
> the poetry to get back to the thought, then paint the feeling
> back in with some other poetic elements.
That is the problem I have with your version. I don't think you have got
to the thought by veering off into lalDan. The text, while in a religious
context, is not about "lalDan" (religion) - it is about LOVE. The full
chapter uses some religious terms/language (angels, prophecy) but never
mentions any deity. It is an exposition of a deep sacrificial love
"Love is patient and is kind; love doesn't envy. Love doesn't brag,
is not proud, doesn't behave itself inappropriately, doesn't seek its
own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil; doesn't rejoice in
unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things,
believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things..."
- which I'd guess at some *level* is included in parmaq.
** joel anderson * [email protected] * http://umn.edu/~joela **
*** QI'tu' Holmey ghot Holmey je vIlo'chugh, ***
*** 'ach parmaq vIghajbe'chugh, vaj jIchuSchoHqu' ***
*** [email protected] **** [email protected] ***