tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 25 01:56:27 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: _Inferno_ 3:1-9

(1) Steven Boozer wrote:
[following up to my posting of _ghe''or_ 3:1-9]
> [...] what I said to torroS about his rendering of They Might Be
> Giant's "Stomp Box" applies equally to Dante's "Inferno": provide
> the original text for comparison.

It was posted on this list only about three weeks ago (on 3 January,
to be precise) by Donald Vick (aka taDI'oS alias wIvqu').  Does the
same apply equally to the _Stomp Box_?  I don't mind reposting this
text if necessary, but neither do I want to waste bandwidth.

http://www.crs4.it/~riccardo/Letteratura/DivinaCommedia/Inferno/Inferno.htmlis a place (likely not the only one) where the original can be found.


(2) Terrence Donnelly wrote:
> ghItlh 'Iwvan:
> 
> >  mujuSchugh vay', Do'Ha'ghach vengDaq ghoS;
> 
> Does {juS} mean "pass _through_" or just "overtake, pass by"?

Good question.  If {juS} doesn't work, we'll make that {mu'elchugh}.

> Also, if you want to avoid the controvercial {-ghach}, how about
> 
>     mujuSchugh vay', vaj veng Do'Ha'Daq ghoS

Thing is, it's not an unfortunate city, it is the city of misfortune.
Klingon doesn't use nominalisations as liberally as English does, but
this seems a case where one is genuinely needed.  And although I'm
aware of the {-ghach} controversy, my interpretation of _tKD_ 4.2.9
is that {-Ha'ghach} is all right.

> Actualy, I wonder if {-DI'} would be more appropriate instead of {-chugh}?
> I feel that {-DI'} implies more certainty: "when(ever) one passes through,
> (and it's certain that someone will)", vs. "if someone passes through (but
> they may not)".  It's kind of a subtle distinction; maybe too subtle (or
> maybe the distinction is just in my own mind).

Although I haven't pondered on this enough to be able to prove it,
I somehow feel that in this particular occasion {-DI'} and {-chugh}
end up meaning the same thing:  the degree of conditionality that
usually sets them apart is absorbed by {vay'}.  A generic statement
such as `Through me one gets to Hell' doesn't really say whether
someone will or not.

> >  mujuSchugh vay', mevbe'bogh 'oy'vaD Duv;
>                                    ^^^
>                should this be {-Daq}?

I don't really know.  How do we say `towards'?


(3) Looking at the structure of the _terza rima_, I've got an idea
of a game for people who like translating rhyming and scanning stuff.
Here it is:  Participants take turns translating tercets from a poem
in _terza rima_ form (a canto from _Inferno_ or whatever).  Everyone's
middle line thus provides the rhyme for the next player's first and
last line.  (That gives ample opportunity for making the next player's
life very difficult, so I suppose everyone should start by pledging
his honour not to do that on purpose, and to translate the middle line
by meaning only.)  The metre should be the same for all, of course.

What do people think?


--'Iwvan

-- 
"mIw'e' lo'lu'ta'bogh batlh tlhIHvaD vIlIH [...]
 poH vIghajchugh neH jIH, yab boghajchugh neH tlhIH"
                                  (Lewis Carroll, "_Snark_ wamlu'")
Ivan A Derzhanski  <[email protected], [email protected]>
Dept for Math Lx,  Inst for Maths & CompSci,  Bulg Acad of Sciences
Home:  cplx Iztok  bl 91,  1113 Sofia,  Bulgaria

Back to archive top level