tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 22 13:14:56 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC: Day to Die



According to R.B Franklin:
> 
> > > yoDtarghvo':  Who was it who said, "Today is a good day to die"?
... 
> I correct in assuming that {-meh} can only be used to express volition 
> or intent?

It is apparently only useful in cases where the wording makes
sense as "in order that". TKD says "in order to", but that
implies an infinitive, and of course, Klingon doesn't HAVE
infinitives, so "in order that" works when the verb has a
subject and possibly an object.

Trying to make this clearer: The action of the main verb in the
sentence is being executed for the purpose of the goal implied
by the verb with {-meH}. bIghojmeH bItlhob. "I ask in order that
I learn." My learning is the goal. My asking is the process I
execute as a means toward that goal.

> > Secondly, the word for "today" is {DaHjaj}, not {jajvam}...
> 
> Does this mean I can't say {DISvam} or {jarvetlh} or even {qoSwI'Daq}?

I would tend to shy away from {DISvam} and {jarvetlh} because
they are quite possibly wrong. {qoSwI'Daq} is much more
certainly wrong. The convention we have settled on here would
be {qaStaHvIS qoSwI'} or {qaSDI' qoSwI'} depending on whether
the birthday is being seen as a span of time or a threshold of
time. Is the birthday the environment in which the action of
the main verb happens {-taHvIS}, or is it the trigger that
engages the action of the main verb {-DI'}?

I suspect that there may be those who would defend the use of
{DISvam} and {jarvetlh}, though these words are not especially
attractive in their mix of time and space concepts. Because of
our use of the same prepositions for time and space, English
mixes these concepts all the time. We are unsure that this is
true in Klingon.
 
> I am going to figure out how to say this, even if it kills me.  Perhaps 
> it's a good day after all...  {{;-)>
> 
> My next attempt was:  jIHeghchugh jaj QaQ 'oH DaHjaj'e'. 
> But unfortunately, it implies:  jIHeghbe'chugh jaj qab 'oH DaHjaj'e'.

True. I believe this translation was already suggested, and I
didn't like it for this same reason. Basically, on further
reflection, I decided that the original statement was a very
un-Klingon statement to begin with because the tendency to say
that a day is good or a day is bad seems somewhat abstract in a
way I don't see other canon supporting. But that is just my
opinion. I PERSONALLY think the statement should be closer to:

DaHjaj chaq batlh jIHeghmo' jIQuch.

"Today, because perhaps I die with honor, I am happy."

It is a little strange with multiple adverbials, but I think
the net result expresses the concept clearly without the
abstraction that seems idiomatic to English.

> So I've narrowed in down to three choices:
> 1.  HeghwI'vaD jaj QaQ 'oH DaHjaj'e'.

This is a very interesting twist on the original meaning. I
like it.

> 2.  jaj QaQ 'oH DaHjaj'e' 'e' jIHegh.

This one violates grammatical rules. The {'e'} is used to
represent the previous sentence and it must serve as the OBJECT
of the verb in the FOLLOWING sentence. {jIHegh} has no object,
so {'e'} has no reason to be there and the two sentences do not
hang together.

> 3.  jaj QaQ 'oH DaHjaj'e' 'ej jIHeghrup.
> (How do you say "therefore"?)

Perhaps your intended meaning would come through if you combine
{-rup} with {-mo'}. While it is true that in the main text of
TKD, {-mo'} is only used for nouns, in the appendix it also
becomes a verbal suffix. Hence:

jIHeghrupmo' jaj QaQ 'oH DaHjaj'e'.

"Because I am ready to die, today is a good day."

Not bad at all. This may be the best of the breed among those
keeping close to the original English.

> yoDtargh


charghwI', Beginner's Grammarian



Back to archive top level