tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 09 09:03:31 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Translating Dilbert
pm5:
> >>Boss: "A business magazine is sending a reporter to interview me."
> >>Dilbert: "You?"
> >>Boss: "They want to know my best management practices."
Voragh:
>Using {QonoS} "journal, log" - which many Klingonists use for magazine,
>newspaper, etc. (indeed, the KLI's own online journal is called {Qo'noS
>QonoS} "The Kronos Chronicle" - we can translate it easily as *{malja'
>QonoS} "business journal".
ter'eS:
> > Note that {Sov} takes the {0-} 'they-them' prefix
> > because the object is plural ('methods'), but {luneH}
> > needs the prefix {lu-} 'they-it', because its
> > "object" is a single item, the verb {Sov}.
lay'tel:
>Is there a canon example of {lu-} on {neH} like this? All the instances I
>have have only {0-}, {vI-}, {Da-}, or {nuq-}.
AFAIK there are no examples of {luneH} anywhere in canon. I doubt it means
anything and is surely only an artefact of the limited size of the sample.
I think lay'tel is troubled by the shift in subject from singular ("a
business magazine") to plural "they", which is common in colloquial
English. There's also the difference between British and American English
WRT collective nouns. Wouldn't British English speakers tend to use a
plural subject for the magazine and its editorial board? Cf. "the
committee are in session, Parliament are, etc." [UK] vs. "the committee is
in session, Congress is, etc." [US]. To completely avoid problems like
this, you might want to express the subject - and not change it:
muyu'meH wa' ja'wI' ngeH malja' QonoS.
vu'meH mIwmeywIj nIvqu' Sov neH.
Here {neH} can refer either to the magazine or the reporter, but not both.
muyu'meH wa' ja'wI' ngeHlu'.
vu'meH mIwmeywIj nIvqu' Sov neH malja' QonoS.
The first sentence uses an indefinite subject, the second a definite
singular subject. (Collective nouns are grammatically singular in
Klingon: e.g. {qorDu'}, {yejquv}, {tuq}.)
pm5:
> >>Dilbert: "You?"
> >> {qatlh?}
ter'eS:
> > Why not just use {SoH} 'you'?
lay'tel SIvten:
>Then how to express the interrogative? Intonation? Analogous to {tlha'a
>Hod}'s {'entepray''a'?}? {SoH'a'?} does that, but then it may be adding too
>much. I thought {qatlh?} was a good equivalent of the English.
Although {qatlh} "why?" is perfectly fine, what's wrong with
intonation? If you insist on adding a suffix, how about combining {'e'}
"topic" with intonation: {SoH'e'?} "You (of all people)?!"
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons