tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jul 30 09:12:07 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: wej qIDmey

ja' Edy:
>verengan qunqachDaq* (museum) luSuch tlhIngan ghom. 
>A group of klingons were visiting a ferengi museam.

If the verb prefix is {lu-}, then there should be an object.  But by 
using the noun suffix {-Daq}, you've turned it into a locative.  Take 
off the {-Daq} and "they visit a museum" works fine.

Perhaps something with {bey'} "ceremonial display" would work better 
than a vague and uninspired {qach}.

Although a group is made up of multiple things or people, it is 
treated grammatically as a singular entity.  The verb prefix {lu-} 
isn't correct in the first place.  Perhaps you could just refer to 
{tlhInganpu'} and drop the {ghom} altogether.

>thop ghot Hommey (skeleton) yIt 'e' lumev 'ej DevwI' ghel:
>They stoped in front of a skeleton and asked to the guide:

This took me a very long time to work through.  It's got lots of 
little problems.  First, a relatively trivial one: you misspelled
{tlhop} "area in front".  Now for the others.

{tlhop} and other such location-indicating nouns go after the noun 
or pronoun they're associated with.  {DaS bIng} "the boot's beneath-
area" or "the area below the boot."  {Hom tlhop} "the bone's front-
area" or "the area in front of the bone."

Bones are body parts, right?  A skeleton would be {HomDu'}; saying 
{Hommey} makes me think of a pile of random bones or a bunch of bones 
strewn across the ground.

You need to indicate that {tlhop} is the location where the walking 
was happening (or stopping, in this case).  {ghot HomDu' tlhopDaq} 
"in front of the skeleton."

The phrase is rather odd-sounding anyway -- I know you mean they
stopped in front of the skeleton, but it might be read as suggesting
that they had been walking in front of it but stopped doing that; i.e.
they are now walking somewhere else.

Using {'ej} as if it meant "and then" is almost just a matter of 
style, but I think this works better if you make this two entirely 
separate sentences.

{ghel} means "ask (a question)".  I think if you want to indicate the 
person being asked, you need to say {DevwI'vaD}.  Either that, or use 
the verb {yu'} "interrogate".

{ghot HomDu' tlhopDaq yev.  DevwI' luyu':}
"They paused in front of a skeleton.  They questioned the guide:"

>- 'Ivvo' ghot Hommeyvam
>- From whom is this skeleton?

You've got nothing in the Klingon sentence that resembles a verb. 
{'Ivvo'} "from whom" is an unusual construction, but it makes sense. 
But what is this skeleton doing, or what is being done to it?  Maybe 
something like {'Ivvo' HomDu'vam lutlhaplu'pu'?} "From whom have these
bones been taken?"

>- *Eurico* ghaHpu' loDvam'e', verengan qonwI' quv
>- This man was Eurico, a great ferengi poet

Apposition should really put the name and its description next to one 
another.  You've separated them in the Klingon.  {qonwI'} is 
"composer"; {bomwI'} would be "poet".  "Great" and "honored" aren't 
quite the same thing, but I guess they're not very far apart.  And 
"was" shouldn't be translated {ghaHpu'}.

Either put {Eurico, verengan bomwI'} together, or make it two distinct
sentences:  {Eurico ghaH loDvam'e'.  verengan bomwI' ghaH.}

>- 'ej 'Ivvo' ghot Hommeyvam run
>- And from whom is this small skeleton?

This has the same problems as the previous question, plus an odd use 
of {run} "be short (in stature)".  Perhaps you just meant {mach}?

>- *Eurico* puqloD ghaHpu' ghot Hommeyvam'e'
>- This skeleton was Eurico when he was a boy.

The joke is completely lost in your Klingon.  The best I can get out 
of it is "These scattered bones of a person have been Eurico's son."
Try again, using something like {QuptaHvIS Eurico} or {Eurico Qup} or 
perhaps {nenpa'}.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level