tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 30 14:09:16 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

RE: KLBC: Shakespear



November 28, 1996 10:01 AM, jatlh HurghwI':

> >> "Cry havoc, and let loose the dogs of war!"
> mIS yIjach, 'ej veS targhmey tItlhabmoH!

This translates correctly.

> >> "Have we not heard the chimes at midnight?"
> >> ramjep *chime*-mey DIQoybe''a'?
> >> I was not sure how to best translate "chimes." There was nothing even
> >> remotely close.
> >
> >ramjep chuSwI' DIQoypu'be''a'?
> 
> I thought of this, but chimes aren't really noise makers. They are pleasant,
> not noisy, so what about {chuSwI'Hom}. Still, if you say "Have we not heard
> the small noise-makers at midnight?" they won't know what the heck you're
> talking about.

Without a context, no.  As I've stated, I don't know what the context is 
(never read that play).  That's why I also suggested {ghum}.  What's the point 
of the chimes?  To signal midnight?  I doubt Klingons use pleasant ones.  If 
they need to mark midnight, something will buzz.

> >> "To be, or not to be."
> >taH pagh taHbe'.
> Besides, I had not been aware of the second meaning.

It's in the Addendum of TKD, and has also been used in TKW.

mataHmeH maSachnIS.
narghbe'chugh SuvwI' qa' taH may'.

> 'oH mach 'e' yap'a'?

Eek!  "Is 'it' sufficient that the small it."  You're trying to write "Is this 
short enough?"  What is the 'it' of {yap}?  Don't try to use a 
sentence-as-subject construction: they're illegal.  And that's what you've 
tried to do without knowing it.  The "it" which is sufficient is the 
smallness, and is therefore the subject.

yIjatlh: <jabbI'IDvam bIng mach law' latlh bIng puS.  yap'a'?>

jatlh "Internet" pabqoq: <loS mu'tlhegh logh neH yIlo' jabbI'ID bIng 
DaghItlhtaHvIS>.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 96916.5


Back to archive top level