tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 29 11:38:53 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Thinking and compounding
- From: [email protected] (HoD trI'Qal)
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Thinking and compounding
- Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 14:39:51 -0400
At 10:17 PM 9/8/96 -0700, Denny Shortliffe wrote:
>[snip]
>
>>If I remember my French correctly, the original expresion "I
>>think, therefore I am" was REALLY "Je crois, <I've forgotten the word for
>>"therefor"> j'exist." ("I think, therefore I exist").
>
>My understanding is that the original expression was in Latin, "Cogito
>ergo sum". This uses the Latin for "to be" which carries with it the
>meaning of "to exist" but is not limited to that. So the conundrum
>continues. (Don't we English-speakers love our alliteration!)
Whether or not it was in French or in Latin, my point about translations of
translations is still valid. {{:)
>>This goes back, I think to several people's comments on "translations on
>>translations", and why you should always go back to the original, before you
>>try to translate something. This is also another example of how English
>>uses "to be" WAY too much, and you really should re-cat it, before you
>>attempt to translate it into tlhIngan Hol.
>
>I'm not aware that English uses "to be" too much, not any more than French
>or Portuguese, two other languages with which I happen to be familiar.
>Perhaps tlhIngan Hol doesn't use it enough (perhaps MO planned it that way
>just to give us something to do in our evenings!).
Well, let's see. You used it twice in the above paragraph, and for both
instances, I can find another verb which will convey the same or very
similar meaning ("to know" for "to be aware" and "have knowledge" for "to be
familiar").
tlhIngan Hol does not use it enough, because it DOES NOT HAVE IT.
What???
That's right. We have a structure where we can compare two nouns together,
but there is NO VERB "TO BE" in Klingon. My proof? Page 67, the first
sentence under 6.3:
There is no verb corresponding to English "to be" in Klingon.
If I remember my history correctly, yes, it WAS because Marc Okrand did not
want "to be" being used all over the place, which is one reason why a number
of people on the list (myself included!) will jump all over you if you
nominalize a verb, and then use it in that pronoun-thing described in 6.3.
Why not just use the verb as a VERB? It gives more flavour to your
sentences, and is usually shorter/more precise.
So, no, it isn't that Klingon does not use "to be" enough; it is that
English speakers (and yes, I am just as guilty of this as anyone else, so
don't bother counting my uses of the verb "to be" in this post... I KNOW it
will be high!) tend to over-use it--hey, it was the fist verb we learned,
after all! Klingon, on the other hand, doesn't even HAVE this verb, so when
you want to express an English phrase to Klingon, you have to take care that
you don't translate word-for-word, instead of concept-for-concept...
>Qapla'
--tQ
---
HoD trI'Qal, tlhIngan wo' Duj lIy So' ra'wI'
Captain T'rkal, Commander IKV Hidden Comet (Klingon speaker and net junkie!)
HaghtaHbogh tlhIngan yIvoqQo'! toH... qatlh HaghtaH Qanqor HoD???
monlI'bogh tlhInganbe' yIvoqQo'! SoHvaD monlI' trI'Qal...