tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 07 08:00:17 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

KLBC - DaH mughqa' tuv'el 'e' nIDlaw'

KLBC - DaH mughqa' tuv'el 'e' nIDlaw'

naDev jabbI'IDmey tu'lu' jay'!  vIlaD bIH Hoch vIneH 'ach poH yap
vIHutlh
jIH.  ghay'cha'!  vInuDnIS bIH.  pIj jIDach.  chay' bIH
bobuSqangchu'bogh
bowIvlaH?  HIja'.


DaH vIQIj:

muja' Qov:
> > 'ej DaH vay'vaD pImqu':

> Ugh.  the translation doesn't work.  I thought for a while that this
> was referring to the accordians and you had meant nIb instead of pIm,
> i.e. for most people bad meSchuS playing is identical to any other
kind.
>
> This says "and now, for the benefit of someone/something,
> it/he/she/they is/are quite different."

I was trying to say, "And now for something completely different..."


DaH vImugh:

Qov ja' ghunchu'wI':
> SoHvaD potlhbe'ba' QoQ, Qov.  bIval 'ej bIqu'.  vay' Daghoj
DaneHchugh,
> DayajlaHbej.  Hol rur QoQ; mu'tayHey pabHey je ghaj.  mI'mey Holqoq
> rurlaw' QoQ Holqoq.  puSqu' QoQ QoylaHqu'be'bogh nuv.  puSbe' QoQ
> Qoychu'meH mIw Sovbe'bogh nuv.  mIw DaSovbe' neH 'e' vIHarchu'.
Music is obviously not important for you, Qov.  You are clever and
fierce.
If you want to learn anything, you can certainly understand it.  Music
resembles language; they have apparent vocabulary and apparent grammar.
The so-called language of music seems to resemble the so-called language
of
numbers.  There are very few people who really can't hear music.  There
are
not a few people who don't know a procedure to hear music perfectly.  I
clearly believe that you just don't know the process.

> Do'Ha' ghojmoHmeH mIw vISovbe' jIH.  qay'be' -- bIghoj DaneHqu'chugh,
> bIghoj'eghmoHlaH 'e' vIpIH.
Unfortunately, I don't know the process for teaching.  No problem --
If you really want to learn, I expect you can teach yourself.

> bIbomchu'be''a'?  ram.  ghoghlIj vIparbe'.  le'qu'.  tugh vIQoyqa'jaj.

You can't sing well?  It's unimportant.  I don't dislike your voice.
It is very exceptional.  May I soon hear it again.


ja' charghwI':
> > batlh may'ronmey law' vISIQta'. jIyoHba', qar'a'?
I have endured many accordions with honor.  I am obviously brave, right?

ja' ghunchu'wI':
> bIyoHlaw', 'ach DIronmey'e' DaqaDrup'a'?
You seem brave, however are you ready to confront bagpipes?

> chay' pIm DIron chuS'ugh?
> meQmeH, chuS'ugh nI' law' DIron nI' puS.
How do bagpipes and a chuS'ugh differ?
A chuS'ugh burns longer than bagpipes.


ja' Qov:
> pa' potlhwI' tu'lu'.  QoQ wIDelmeH Deghmey DIwIv 'ach wanI'meyna'
> DIDel.  Qo'noSDaq tera'Daq loghDaq je QoQ luDellaH yu'eghmey.
> napHa'ghach vIQoylaHbe' jIH 'ach QeD'e' vIvuv.  mI'QeD rur QoQ. Hol
> tIgh je juSchu'.  QoQ DelmeH potlhbe' tlhIngan yajmeH mIw.  yu'eghmey
> DIDellaH neH. QoQ yajbe'chu' Hoqra', 'ach yu'eghmey qonlaH 'ej
> muchlaH.  QoQvetlh luDellaH je mu'mey luyajbe'taHvIS.  mu'meyvetlh'e'
> nejlaw' QoQ luparHa'bogh jatlhwI'pu'ma'. vIyajlaw'.
There are important things over there.  We choose symbols to describe
music, but we describe definite events.  Waves can describe music on
Kronos, on Earth, and in outer space.  I can't hear the complexity, but
I respect the science.  Music resembles number theory.  It clearly
overtakes language and custom.  A procedure for understanding Klingon
is not important for describing music.  Just so we can describe waves.
A Tricorder clearly can't understand music, but it can record waves and
can perform music.  They can also describe that music while not
understanding the words.  Our speakers who like music seem to seek those

words.  I apparently understand them.


maSwov ja' Qov:

> taghwI' Dapqoq vItIv.
[I enjoy my lung's so-called nonsense.]
[I enjoy one who initiates so-called nonsense.]


tuv'el ja' pagh:
> > Why would ternary HAVE to be based on 0,1, & 2. If you don't
> > acknowledge the 0
> > (sorry pagh), then you have 1, 2, 3, 11=4, 12=5, 13=6, 21,
> > 22, 23, 31, 32,
> > 33=12, etc.
> >
>
> bIlughchu'. qatlh nuv law'vaD Qatlh qechvam? mI' pagh noplu'chugh vaj
loQ
> Qatlh SImmeH Qu', 'ach QaptaH pat. pIjHa' SImnISqu' lutlhwI'.
You are perfectly correct.  Why does this idea seem difficult for so
many
people?  If one leaves out the number zero then the task of calculating
is
a little bit complex, however the system works.  A Primitive very seldom

needs to calculate it.

> tIQ tlhIngan toghmeH patvam, 'ej tera' toghmeH patmey tIQ rur. mI'
pagh
> qelbe'taH tIQbogh tera'ngan tayqeq law'. luyajmeH lutlhwI', pagh Qatlh

> law' wa' Qatlh puS. Dochna' 'oS wa', 'ach nuq 'oS pagh? chay' pagh
Doch
> leghlu'?  chay' pagh Doch toghlu'?
This ancient Klingon system for counting resembles ancient Terran
counting
systems.  Many ancient Terran civilizations didn't take the number zero
into account.  Primitives that understand it, zero is more complex than
one.  One represents something definite, but what does zero represent?
How does one see a none-thing?  How does one count a none-thing?


qaStaHvIS wa'maH cha' pemmey wa'maH cha' rammey je, tlhIngan Hol vIHaD.
jIDubchoH'a'?


- tuv'el pach puqloD

Back to archive top level