tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 23 14:58:09 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: The `Ring Rhyme' in Klingon



Sometime [email protected] said..

> On Fri, 19 May 1995 15:20:19 -0400, Karl Dyson <[email protected]> said:
> [replying to me]
> >> >  "Three rings for the elven kings under the sky"
> >> 
> >> Isn't it `Elf-kings' rather than `Elven kings' in the original?
> > My copy says "Elven-kings"
> 
> Yes, so does mine.  Sorry about that.
What!?! An appology.. can this be so?

> > Be fair.. Okrand was hardly going to invent a word for Elfs..
> 
> Certainly not.  The thing to do, then, is to borrow the English word,
> given that the Klingons would be most likely to learn about the Elves
> from English speaking Terrans and English literature.  If you do so,
> however, you should make it conform to Klingon phonology.
Well since I was only guessing at the phonology.. I didn't notice TKD said
"you must not put a j next to an e like Khalic does!".
Perhaps if I had a better understanding of Klingon phonology then I would't
make such mistakes.. therefore someone should point out how the damn thing
works in the first place.

> > I came accross the problem of no equivalent so I thought I'd make
> > one up for the context of this passage..
> 
> But you didn't.  *{jelv} is not a possible Klingon word.
Why not? Or is it too much trouble for you to explain this so that I won't
make the same mistake again?

> >> > and used a compound noun with che'wI - Elevn rulers??
> >> 
> >> That's {che'wI'}.  Try making them `Elf-emperors'.
> > Sorry.. missed of the ' eh!?!
> 
> Looks like it.  Missing a {'} in Klingon is the same thing as missing
> a {j} or a {tlh}.
..

> >> Hm.  {HeghnISbogh Humanpu' jubbe'vaD Hut}?
> > Okay but I was trying to avoid saying that they 'needed'
> > to die.. I'm sure they'd be prefectly happy not too :)
> 
> They would; they are not willing to die, but they must.
> {Heghqangbe' 'a HeghnIS}.
Perhaps they must, and perhaps someone else needed them to die but I can't
see why *they* needed themselves to die. Afterall, if they all died then who
would fight the orks? Perhaps the elves.. but who's to say that they
wouldn't lose without the humans..

> > [...] you've mainly criticised me for making up words and rightly
> > so.. but since the intention of the translation was to help me learn
> > to put scentances together..
> 
> There is not a single complete sentence in the Rhyme, so its translation
> can't help you learn to put sentences together, although it does contain
> a couple of challenging constructions (we'll probably need to hear Okrand's
> verdict on relativisation before we can translate the last line with any
> confidence; it contains a shared element which is a locative in both the
> main and the subordinate clause).
Aha.. well you are certainly very efficient at using long words to ill-effect.

> > I don't think its too serious.
> 
> I thought it was serious enough to warrant a response.
Obviously..

> > [...] you haven't made much of an effort to help me learn anything..
> 
> Quite right.  I haven't.
I see we agree on something.

> > true its not your job but I was assuming that you would rather
> > promote the language by helping people than consistantly critiscing
> > mistakes!
> 
> It is not my job to promote the language.  I am, however, willing
> to help people by consistently criticising their mistakes.
Well, may I say that you don't do a very could job at helping people.. at
least not in this case.




Back to archive top level