tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 05 16:00:13 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: yIHnaQ
On 05-Mar-99, Rose, Thornton (Atlanta) wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From:Jeremy Silver [SMTP:[email protected]]
>> Sent:Friday, March 05, 1999 4:33 PM
>> To:Multiple recipients of list
>> Subject:RE: KLBC: yIHnaQ
>>
>> >> bIQDep DavutmeH tlhIch Dulo'. nIQ vISopmeH jIcheghta'
>> >> Would you tell me what you think I written. I don't what to tell
>> >> you what I think so you will tell me what you interpretation is.
>> >Well, except for a typo (<Dulo'> should be <Dalo'>), you've said "You
>> smoke the fish. I have returned for breakfast".
>>
>> I think what he had in mind was "Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for
>> breakfast".
>> I wouldnt mind working out the "correct" tlhIngan Hol for that myself, but
>> it will take me all night.
>>
>Here are my attempts at it:
>{jIHvaD *kipper* yIvut. nIQ vISopmeH jIchegh.} - First cut.
for-me a-kipper you-cook. Breakfast, I-eat-it-for, I-return.
Smoking is a preservation method. So I reckon the original poster had the
right idea using the word tlhIch somewhere.
Would "I-return-for-breakfast" work alone? e.g. {nIQ vIcheghmeH}.
Even with the original English phrase the eating is only implied. For all
anyone knows you might be returning with the intention of slapping someone
around the face with a wet (or dried and soot-stained) fish. Would the
directness of Klingon culture require the qualification of eating?
As kipper is a name of something (and that burnt animal e.g. kipper is not
likely to be on a Klingon menu) the first method was probably most correct. I
think people here prefer people to just quote the word using whatever method
this list favours, and dont bother transliterating it. It might need
subtitling/describing for the peeps that dont know what one is though.
Besides, something vaguely to do with hitting labels, might appear cannon
later. {telDu' ghajchugh Suy'mey} (Did I get that right?)
So one night later (with a bit of help to speed things up) we end up with
something like:
{jIHvaD *kipper* yItlhIch. nIQ vIcheghmeH}
Strictly speaking {tlhIch} is a noun, and shouldnt be used like this - but
some nouns are the same as verbs. How do you know which nouns can act like
verbs or vice-versa? Can we only use cannon examples?
Anyone need to shoot the resulting attempt full of holes?
Thanks,
--
Jeremy Silver |\ [email protected]
__________________| \ [email protected]
|__________________| |
| | A1200, Blizzard 1260, 34Mb
mupwI' yI'uchtaH! |__| 1.4Gb HD. Amiga Forever.