tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Dec 09 09:44:41 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: jatlh qeylIS


ghItlh yoDtargh

>> I would like one of the eminent grammarians here to critique a >translation
>> if someone would so favor me.
>>
>> The original:
>>   A Klingon's honor is everything.  Conquest, revenge, lust for battle,
>> desire for another, family, friends, personal aspirations and personal
>> well-being pale before the demands of Honor.
>>
>> translation:
>>      tlhInganvaD Hoch ratlh batlh.
>
>I would say something like:
>
>tlhIngan balth potlh law' Hoch potlh puS.
>
     Yes, I think that does it better, although I liked the sound of <ratlh
batlh.>

>> poQDI' batlh ramchoH charghlaHghach bortaS may'nongnISghach muSHa'ghach
>> qorDu' juppu' ghot ngoQmey ghot ropHa'ghach je
>
>I would use {charghtaHghach} for "conquest", and {may' nongtaHghach} for
>"lust for battle".  I don't think {muSHa'ghach} conveys the idea of
>"desire for another".  Is desire really a Klingon virtue?
>
     <may' nongtaHghach> would work for battle lust, I think.  I had my
doubts about the -nIS-, that it might be considered overkill, but I have
seen people inveigh here against the overuse of -taH- in forming nouns with
-ghach-.
     <charghtaHgach> would, of course, work for conquest, but I felt that
<charghlaHghach> conveyed a meaning more suitable to what I was saying.  I
would like to see more discussion on that point.
     <muSHa'ghach> would be akin to love, which I suppose is close to what
I was really driving at with the "desire for another" phrase.  Actually I
wanted something that would include both love and carnal desire.  But, no,
I did not intend for it to be thought of as a virtue, rather something that
might distract the weak from the demands of honor, and, therefore, just the
opposite of a virtue.  Perhaps <ghot muSHa'ghach> would have been better?
But would <ghot> be clearly understood to be the object of the
<muSHa'ghach>?  It seems that it could also mean another's love for you.
On the other hand, perhaps <muSHa'ghach>, standing alone, could suggest
another both as agent and patient.   And maybe I should just have used <bang>.


     Qapla'

     qeSmIv HarghwI'

Back to archive top level