tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Apr 25 19:38:45 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Rio de Janeiro & Carnaval
Edy, something about the way you sent this message makes it difficult for me
to read it. There are no line breaks and a lot of the {'} characters have
been turned into "ë" and "í", which appear on my screen as an e-dieresis and
an i-acute. I can deal with it, but it would help if you could at least put
line breaks in. Turning off "smart quotes" is always a good idea when writing
Klingon anyway. :-)
ja' Edy:
>*Rio de janeiro* vengDaq maghIQpu' wej juppu' jIH je.
Good, though the word {veng} is probably unnecessary. You didn't vacation
in Rio's city; you vacationed in Rio itself.
>ngaj leng 'ach matIv.
>'IHqu' *Rio* veng.
Does one customarily say "the city of Rio de Janeiro"? If so, {veng} isn't
bad. It's not *wrong* in any case, but I'd leave it out myself.
>bochmoHqu' juH Hov(1) 'ej tujqu' pem.
{bochmoH} means "shine" as in "cause to be shiny". {waqmey lubochmoHlu'}
One shines shoes. You might mean just {boch} "be shiny", but I'd suggest
the word {wew} "glow".
Or maybe you *do* mean the sun causes things to be shiny; if that's the case,
maybe you could say {Hoch bochmoH juH Hov} "the Sun makes everything shine."
"Home star" is as good a way to say "Sun" as any.
>lengwI' Daq(2) law' maSuch 'ej Do' *Salvador Dali* rItlhmey DIleghlaH je.
{lengwI' Daq} is vague, but I suppose it works. However, you need to say
{DISuch}; {Daq} here is an object, not a locative like {-Daq} the suffix.
Do you mean you saw Dali's actual pigments? That's what {rItlh} means.
If you're referring to his paintings, {nagh beQ} "stone panel" is about
the closest thing in the Klingon vocabulary we have.
>mebpa'meyHom maQong.
You left off a {-Daq}.
>mebpa'meyvo' bIQ'a' wIleghlaH 'ej qaStaHvIS po maqeq(3).
{qeq} for "swim" doesn't do a good job here. Perhaps {bIQDaq mamI'}?
>le' jajvammo' yuch wISopbej.
>*Pao de Acucar*Daq maghoS.
TKD page 28 says this phrasing is somewhat redundant. The preferred way to
say it would be {*Pao de Acucar* wIghoS}.
>qoj jen Daqvam 'ej veng wIleghlaHchu'.
There's something wrong with the first few words. If you mean "This site
is a high cliff", you're missing an {'oH} and an {-'e'}. You might say
{jen Daqvam qoj} "This location's cliff is high."
>noy *Rio* veng 'ej noy je *Carnaval* .
I think using {'ej} and {je} here is a bit much, but it's grammatical.
>*Brasil*vo' *Carnaval* lopno' noy law' Hoch noy puS.
Lose the {-vo'}. "Brasil's Carnaval celebration" works just fine without it.
>yupma' 'oH'e' je.
What's the {-'e'} doing there? {'oH} is the only verb-like thing here, and
verbs don't get noun suffixes.
>qaStaHvIS loS jaj, bommeH mI'meH je QuvDaq(4) jaH nuvpu'.
{bommeH 'ej mI'meH}. TKW page 5: {SuvmeH 'ej charghmeH bogh tlhInganpu'}
"Klingons are born to fight and to conquer."
Are you using {QuvDaq} as a compound "coordinate-location" or as a noun with
a locative suffix? {jaH} doesn't take an object; it needs a locative. TKW
page 38: {may'Daq jaHDI' SuvwI' juppu'Daj lonbe'} "When a warrior goes to a
battle, he does not abandon his friends."
Most of us use {He} for "street". It usually doesn't matter whether or not
one is referring to the route or the physical pavement.
>QoQ Dujmey(5) law' tu'lu' 'ej chuSqu'moH.
In context, "music ships" sounds a little like a parade float. I've never
encountered the term "alegoric car" -- is that like English "allegory" which
means characters and events portraying abstract concepts?
Whenever I see {tu'lu'} used in a sentence with another verb like {law'}, I
usually find it's a lot more straighforward to turn it around so the other
verb is the main one. {law' QoQ Dujmey} "Music ships are many." That also
makes the subject of the two halves of the sentence the same.
{chuSqu'moH} says these "alegoric cars" make things in general noisy. Is
that what you meant? Or did you just mean {chuSqu'} "they are very noisy"?
>*Samba* QoQ lureH 'ach yupma' QapmeH 'ovchuqnIS.
KGT tells us that the word for "perform music" is {much} (page 71).
I'm not sure {'ov} is transitive; {'ovchuq} might not make sense.
I am sure that {'ovnIS} "must compete" is adequate for what you mean.
>*Sunday* jaj cha'qa' QapwI'mey.
"Sunday's day" or "the day of Sunday" is too redundant. Drop the {jaj}.
{cha'} is probably fine, but consider using {much} again.
>qaStaHvIS *Carnaval*, Dat *Samba* boSamba'.
It's a bit contrived, but it's very nice! You do realize, of course, that
the word {Sam} means "seek and find", and {tu'} would be a much better word
if you weren't going for the pun.
>rInDI' *Carnaval* Doy' nuvpu' 'ach qaStaHvIS DIS lopno' Dunvam luqaw'taH.
majQa'!
I'm impressed, Edy. When I first read through this piece, I had no problems
at all understanding it (after I fixed the {'} problem, that is). Most of my
comments are minor nit-picks and style issues.
-- ghunchu'wI'