tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 20 17:00:35 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: DCKL translation problems: {tlhogh}
Voragh:
> >To divorce Quark in DS9 "House of Quark", Grilka shouted *N'Gos tlhogh
> >cha!* ("This marriage is dissolved!") at him. So, *IF* we accept this
> >Paramount source (since we have nothing else), we ignore the all-purpose
> >particle *cha* - which the Paramount writers add to just about every
> >Klingon sentence they write - leaving us with the phrase *{tlhogh ngoS}
> >"dissolve the marriage" which is not a bad way of saying "divorce".
ghunchu'wI':
>Why did you (1) change the word order from "N'Gos tlhogh" to {tlhogh ngoS},
>and (2) change the phrasing from "it is dissolved" to "dissolve it"?
Except that {ngoS} is glossed only as "dissolve", not "be dissolved". So
rather than re-write the definition, I simply flipped the words. If you
figure that the writer simply looked up the words for "dissolve marriage",
in that order, then you get {tlhogh ngoS} in proper {ta' Hol}.
>It seems to me that the DS9 usage would suggest {ngoS tlhogh} as the proper
>formula.
The English subtitle "This marriage is dissolved" would have to be {ngoSlu'
tlhoghvam}.
Note: I wasn't trying to explain the traditional (?) {no' Hol} formula of
{ngoS tlhogh cha!}, merely to come up with a relatively easy way to say
"divorce" or "get divorced" based on Paramount screen "canon". {tlhoghwIj
vIngoSpu'} "I have dissolved my marriage" is one way to say "I've gotten a
divorce, I've been divorced, I'm divorced, etc." in "modern" {ta' Hol}.
Of course, another (perhaps better) way might be to take the two marriage
verbs and add {-Ha'} "undo" - *{nayHa'} and *{SawHa'} - *IF* we knew how
they were used. (I.e. do they take objects, presumably the name of the
person you're marrying?)
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons