tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 19 13:37:15 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Re: qechmey vIHutlh
ja' charghwI':
> On Sun, 15 Feb 1998 06:39:22 -0800 (PST) Christiane Scharf
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > ja' charghwI':
> >
> > > On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 13:44:38 -0800 (PST) Christiane Scharf
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > ghItlh Qov :
> > > >
> > > > > At 12:33 98-02-08 -0800, HovqIj wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > }HIpIch! <chay' "We tell each other a story" vImugh?>
> > > > > }jItlhob...
>
> > > While I agree that it requires more words, I will offer how I'd
> > > say it:
> > >
> > > lut qajatlh 'ej lut chojatlh.
> > >
> > > When you say, "We tell each other a story," there are really two
> > > stories involved, right? I tell you one and you tell me one. You
> > > can figure that the English is rather idiomatic, so it will
> > > require a bit of care to translate well...
>
> > > While we say, "tell a story", I suspect in Klingon the verb
> > > would be {jatlh}.
> > >
> > > > HovqIj
> > >
> > > charghwI'
> >
> > Thanx, but my sentence was actually supposed to be past tense.
> > I asked that question a few months ago and I already got
> > answers. I like {maja'chuqtaHvIS lut wIjatlh}. The only
> > problem of that sentence is that {ja'chuq} can also mean
> > "discuss".
> >
> > HovqIj
>
> My problem with this is that it sounds like, "While we discuss,
> we tell a story." You might very well be each reading parts of
> different characters of the same story, performing it to a third
> person. The whole reason I offered my translation was that I
> didn't like this attempt. It did not seem to convey the meaning
> that I tell you a story and you tell me one.
>
> Klingon doesn't have a second device to fall back on besides
> {-chuq} to indicate exchanges between two individuals, and that
> only works for verbs which can take a person as the object. In
> this case, you want to have the other person as the indirect
> object and the story as the direct object. The only way to do
> this well is to split it as I did where the direct and indirect
> objects are shown for one direction of the telling, and a second
> sentence showing the other direction of the telling. It
> additionally clarifies that we are talking about two stories and
> not just one.
>
I agree with you that my sentence wasn't too good, but yours isn't
actually what I want, either. I admit I should have written "stories"
instead of "story", but I didn't think too much about context at that
time. I just wondered if there was a grammatical construction that could
be used generally.I'll explain what I look for:
A group of warriors is meeting. They sit together, drink, sing,
whatever... and they tell each other the famous stories of Kahless.
Here are some new attempts:
1.majatlhchuq. lutmey DIjatlh. -We talk to each other. We tell stories.
(Note that I changed {ja'chuq} into {jatlhchuq}; I think it's better
because it can't be misunderstood so easily)
That's the easiest way. But it is likely to be interpreted that we both
talk to each other and tell stories, maybe it's even understood as a
sequence of actions.
2.majatlhchuqtaHvIS lutmey DIjatlh. - While we are talking to each other
we tell stories.
Similar. Could be two different actions, but they are definitely
happening at the same time.
3. lut jatlhtaH maH wa' nuv 'ej 'IjtaH maH latlh nuv. qaSpu'DI' ghaH
luDa latlh nuv. - One of us tells a story and the others of us are
listening. When this has happened, others act like him/her.
Very wordy and not too clear, too.
4. lut jatlhtaHvIS maH wa' nuv 'IjtaH maH latlh nuv. qaSpu'DI'... -
While one of us is telling a story, the others of us are listening. When
this...
Almost the same. As wordy as above, no clearer, maybe a bit better in
style.
5. maHvaD lutmey DIjatlh. - We tell stories for us.
I just don't know if that's grammatical. And also a bit ambiguous: It
could mean that every single person is just speaking for him-/herself.
Sounds silly, but they might be totally drunk or influenced by drugs...
Opinions? Better solutions?
> As for tense, that's not an issue in Klingon. Just give some
> sort of time reference at some point in the communication and it
> is taken care of.
>
bIlugh. vIqawqang.
> charghwI'
HovqIj