tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 05 13:59:51 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: bIchuSchoHqu''a'

According to Joel Peter Anderson:
> 
> On Wed, 5 Nov 1997, William H. Martin wrote:
> 
> > jIjatlhchugh 'ach tIqwIjDaq lalDanwIj qechmey vIlajchu'be'chugh
> > vaj ramqu' mu'meywIj. chuStaH neH ghoghwIj. ghIlob ghew vIDa.
> 
> This isn't bad - though I'll stick to my version (if only out of
> cussedness).  
 
qay'be'. 'ach nIyajlaH'a' latlhpu'?

> > The only way I can translate this sort of thing is to peel away
> > the poetry to get back to the thought, then paint the feeling
> > back in with some other poetic elements. 
> 
> That is the problem I have with your version.  I don't think you have got
> to the thought by veering off into lalDan.  The text, while in a religious
> context, is not about "lalDan" (religion) - it is about LOVE.  

Fine. I intended to convey this idea of love as a religion's
thought which you must perfectly accept into your heart.
Apparently that is not good enough and you think parmaq is
better. I doubt many will extract the understanding out of it
that you intended to put into it.

> The full
> chapter uses some religious terms/language (angels, prophecy) but never
> mentions any deity.  It is an exposition of a deep sacrificial love

Still, given its setting, I think it would be a bit assumptive
to function as if this were not a religious issue.

>    "Love is patient and is kind;  love doesn't envy. Love doesn't brag,
>    is not proud, doesn't behave itself inappropriately, doesn't seek its
>    own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil;  doesn't rejoice in
>    unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;  bears all things,
>    believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things..."

And you believe that parmaq satisfies these criteria?

> - which I'd guess at some *level* is included in parmaq.

Daj qechlIj. Huj, 'ach Daj. Meanwhile, you are taking one of
the most vague, overstretched terms in the English langauge and
seeking a one-on-one replacement for it in a setting where the
original authors were so sure that you would not understand the
original word that they spent that much time explaining it.

In yet another language.

So, we start with one language, with a word the author thought
he needed a lot of text to sufficiently explain, translate the
entire explanation into another language. I assume the original
word was "agape", which is one of three words with radically
different meanings which we've lumped together into the English
word "love", and you want to take another word which almost
certainly has yet another take on the concept and just plug it
in.

My own spin on parmaq is that it is more likely related to Eros
than Agape, with lots of testosterone syrup added and maybe
some violently defended honor on the side. Fight side by side,
kill a few common enemies, sneak off to a quiet spot, rip off
each other's clothing, toss in some bruises and lacerations
while sharing bodily fluids and you have parmaq.

Is this what other people think of when they hear parmaq? Does
it have anything to do with the stuff in the paragraph above
beginning "Love is patient and kind"?

> ** joel anderson * [email protected] * http://umn.edu/~joela **
>     *** QI'tu' Holmey ghot Holmey je vIlo'chugh, ***
>  *** 'ach parmaq  vIghajbe'chugh, vaj jIchuSchoHqu' ***   
>   *** [email protected]   ****  [email protected] ***
> 
> 

charghwI'

Back to archive top level