tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 19 07:47:18 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Comments on translations

>From: Nick Nicholas <[email protected]>
>Date: Fri, 19 Nov 1993 21:01:41 +1100 (GMT)

>To Mark E. Shoulson respond I thus:

>I'll answer more of these later; for now:

Thanks.... I've been dying for some good commentary...

>#How about "to lighten [the ship] for/from off them": "chaHvaD tISmoHmeH"?
>#Maybe a little less good.  

>Are you dumping the guys off the ship to lighten it? If so, not good.

No, I'm not dumpoing the guys, I'm dumping wqares merchandise off the ship
to lighten it for/"off" them (according to the text; remember how literal I
get).  This mean it's okay?

>The best I can come up with for the "Because of the ship from which he came"
>problem is rephrasing; Klingon relative clauses are inflexible. Might pay
>me to look tonight at how Turkish, whose relative clauses aren't that 
>dissimilar, from memory, handles them.

I almost came up with a plan the other day, let's see it I can remember it.
It's not the sort of thing I'd use without Okrandian sanction, tough.  "I
see the ship in which I fled": *{'oHDaq vIHaw'pu'bogh Duj vIlegh}.  It's a
little like Welsh relative clauses, which can be things like "I see the
ship, I fled in it."  This would clear up just about all the problems we
have with relative clauses, maybe (I haven't really gone through it much),
but I'd really want to ask Okrand about it.  What are your thoughts, guys?

>#I also made use of the object place in other ways.  For example, Nineveh is
>#described as being "three days' journey [across, presumably]".  So I said
>#"wej jaj nI' lengDaj": its voyage is long three days.  You have to stretch
>#your mind for this one.  

>Nice Esperantism! :) (longas tri tagojn)

Hey, yeah.  That's undoubtedly where I got it from, though I don't think I
realized it.

>#And similarly, "vengDaq wa' jaj leng ghoS" is "He
>#went into the city one day's journey."

>Doesn't this contradict Duj ghoStaH? You're trying to use an etymological
>verb object (he travelled a journey), which is ingenious, but which I think
>requires vengDaq wa' jaj leng leng. Then again, maybe it doesn't; mightn't
>one say vengDaq lengtaH too?

Oh yes, we have evidence of locatives used with {ghoS}, I'm pretty sure,
and I'd think of something like {Duj ghoStaH} as a sort of abbreviation for
the locative form, like {ghIchlIj qanob} was called a short form for
{SoHvaD ghIchlIj vInob}.  This is in line with our understanding that
Klingon "object" places are not rigidly defined (like Loglan/Lojban ones).

~mark

Back to archive top level