tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 15 01:40:03 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: *Maqbet* tidbit

According to Peter Garza:
> 
> 
> Act I Scene I
> 
> wIch be' wa': ghorgh maghomqa' maHwej
>               chuStaHvIS pagh jevtaHvIS pagh SIStaHvIS?

This is good, though {maH} and {wej} should be separate words.
The order is debatable, since placing {wej} second does fit the
English "three of us" well, though it also makes sense to me in
a non-English way to make reference to the three "us"s, in
which case the numeric rule puts {wej} first. As it is, it
sounds like "We #3", like "room #3". I'm open to further
comment on this from others.

On further thought, it might work better to say, "We who are
three" in order to avoid sounding like "thirty"...

I also think it might be better form to explicitly say that it
is the weather that is noisy, etc. using "Okrand's Notes" from
HolQeD vol 2 no 4, page 17. Given these changes, altogether it
would become:

wIch be' wa': ghorgh maghomqa' wej maHbogh
              chuStaHvIS muD pagh jevtaHvIS muD pagh SIStaHvIS muD?


> wIch be' cha': Suvpu'DI'
> 	       qaSDI' pagh qaSbe'DI' veS yay

Oooooh, I don't like this so much. I would much prefer:

wIch be' cha': Suvta'DI' negh 'ej yay ta' vay' 'ej luj latlh

> wIch be' wej: choS 'oH poHvetlh'e'

Hmm. "That will be ERE the set of sun." (My emphasis.) How
about:

wIch be' wej: choS 'oHpa' poHvetlh'e'

> wIch be' wa': nuqDaq
> 
> wIch be' cha': HuDDaq

Unfortunately, a heath is not a hill. It is an open field; a
wasteland. Try {yotlh chImDaq}.

> wIch be' wej: maghom *maqbet* je

I'm not sure that makes sense. How about:

wIch be' wej: paDaq *maqbet* wIghom

> wIch be' wa': jIghoS, *gheymalqIn*

According to two dictionaries, Grimalkin is a name given to an
old she-cat. It would be nice if we could come up with
something that conveyed that sort of animal nature. I'd like
longer to think on this. Meanwhile, I'm still hungry...
 
> wIch be' cha': jach *paDDaq*

The word paddock has two meanings. One is a toad or frog, while
the other is a small field, in modern times most often fenced
in and related to use by race horses. One has to guess, but in
this setting, I'm betting on the frog. Unfortunately, we are
again left without good animal word definitions. I say we pick
an animal name and go with it. The English translators would
not have known what the animal was and they might arbitrarily
pick "frog", right?

> wIch be' wej: tugh
> 
> Hoch: mayghach 'oH HIghghach'e' 'ej HIghghach 'oH mayghach'e'
>       muDDaq Hurgh je muDDaq lam puv

This one isn't easy. The more poetic the English, the more
difficult it is to know how to restore the Klingon. It is a
messy business. I guess this is okay. My own attempt:

Hoch: qab QaQwI' 'ej QaQ qabwI'
      muD HuvHa'Daq yISo' 'ej DungDaq yIghoS

I'm probably cheating with {HuvHa'Daq}, since {-qu'} is the
only suffix I'm sure I can use on an adjectival verb with a
type 5 noun suffix. Meanwhile, I'm open to suggestions on ways
around conveying this, which should be relatively clear as
stated, even if it breaks a grammatical rule.

> Well?
> 
> Peter Garza
> [email protected]

Well?

charghwI'

Back to archive top level