tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 19 03:42:46 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Call for comments: Mark translation

>"This is the gospel about JC, the son of God" (The original doesn't have the
>*this is*, but it's relevant to my question: )
>
>joH'a' puqloD, _yeSuS HIrIStoS_ buSbogh Qum QuQ'e ghaHbej

>I have an apposition here, but if Hod Qanqor used it, he won't critique it ;)
>I inferred the noun Qum from its usage in QumpIn, and TKD 3.2.1. QuQ is
>a noun, and QuQ an adjective, and the whole thing impossible to parse without
>knowing that. It's grammatical --- but is it good Klingon? And does anyone
>have alternative suggestions?

I disagree, I don't see it as grammatical at all.  "QuQ is a noun and QuQ
an adjective".  Huh?  QuQ is a noun meaning "engine".  Somehow I suspect
this is not what you wanted.  I also think you're reaching on Qum.  Qum is
a verb meaning to communicate.  My best guess at what you want is
Qumghach.  Unless you are taking the looser reading of 4.2.9, which I
won't dispute, though it is certainly controversial.  Finally, I don't get
the ghaHbej.  My closest guess is that this is supposed to be doing the
"This is" part, but it doesn't work.  It translates as "He is".  Closer
would be 'oHbej, closest probably 'oHbej Dochvam'e'.


>Btw, I'm going to take to using ghaHbej for the verbal ghaH; PK implies that
>type 6 suffixes are as ubiquitous as honorifics in Japanese.

I'm comfortable with that, though, as I said, you probably wanted 'oHbej.

>"prophet" --- leSSovghot

Nice.

>"messenger" --- Qummang

Somehow I'm more comfortable with this than with the free Qum earlier.
Creating a parallel compound seems safer than deriving a naked root from a
compound.

                --Krankor

Back to archive top level