tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 14 18:56:31 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC: Intro



nagh (Peter Watkins) writes:
>Hello.

Hi, Peter.  Now that you've decloaked, I hope you continue posting.

>This is my first posting to this list. Last year, I completed the postal
>course by David Barron and I have been on lurking the list for last few
>months so I've decided now to 'delurk' or <So'wI' yImev>.

I read this phrase as a command: "You -- stop the cloaking device".
Mixing languages rarely comes out right when the two languages have
grammar as different as English and Klingon, so I'm not sure exactly
what you intended it to mean.

>I've got three phrases to try so here we go:
>
>1.      nagh pongwI' -> My name is Peter

This sentence is missing a verb.  To say "I am [something]", you use the
pronoun {jIH} as if it were a verb meaning "to be": {[vay'] jIH}.  In the
same way, "it is [something]" becomes {[vay'] 'oH}.  If you want to state
a definite subject, you must use the noun suffix {-'e'}.  (See section 6.3
of The Klingon Dictionary for a complete explanation of the two cases where
pronouns are used in this way.)

"My name is rock" comes out as {nagh 'oH pongwIj'e'}.  Marc Okrand probably
would translate this as "As for my name, it is rock."  Just as a matter of
personal preference, I often put this sort of thing the other way around:
{pongwIj 'oH ghunchu'wI''e'}.  I have many names; {ghunchu'wI'} is but one
of them, and my interpretation of "to be" in Klingon is that the subject is
not quite being equated to the object, but somehow being "assigned to" it.
For instance, {ghew 'oH vetlh'e'} "a cockroach is a bug" doesn't mean the
same thing as {vetlh 'oH ghew'e'} "a bug is a cockroach" to me; the second
sentence doesn't seem correct.

>2.      pojtaHbogh tej chamwI' je jIH
>                -> I am an analytical scientist and a technician

Close, very close.  I'm getting very nit-picky here (feel free to ignore
me if nobody else agrees), but this seems to say that you are two people.
It might be slightly clearer as {pojtaHbogh tej jIH 'ej chamwI' jIH}.
I'm not sure why you put {-taH} on the first word; it feels unnecessary.

>3.      Hovmey nuj mInDu'wI' yav'Daq luQamvIS qamDu'wI'
>                -> While my feet are on the ground, my eyes look for the
>                  stars

You misspelled {nej}, and you put an extraneous {'} in {yavDaq}.
The noun suffix {-wI'} is used only with nouns that refer to beings
capable of using language; you should have used {-wIj} (see TKD 3.4).
Whenever you use {-vIS} you must also use {-taH} (see TKD 4.2.9, the
bottom of page 43).  The verb prefix {lu-} indicates a plural subject
(which {qamDu'wIj} is) and a singular object, but there is no object
at all; this should have been the "null" prefix.

Otherwise [:-)] this sentence is okay.  I'm very glad to see that you
didn't try to translate "my feet are on the ground" literally.

>I understand that ghunchu'wI' is the beginner's grammarian so I look
>forward to your comments.

HIja', Qu'vetlh vIghaj.  qaQaHpu' 'e' vItul.

>Qapla', nagh

yIyep, nagh.  DutoS chaq 'e' nID charghwI'. :-)

-- ghunchu'wI'               batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj




Back to archive top level