tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 03 07:02:47 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Some questions
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Some questions
- Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 10:02:23 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Tue, 02 Nov 1999 09:13:29 -0800 Ben Gibson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a couple of questions.
...
> 2) chargwI'. In a recent discussion, I kept stumbling over
> your word Qun. I cannot find it in any of my sources,
> however I did find qun -->scold, (v) or history (n). Could
> this have been a minor typo? The examples are:
Qun = god, supernatural being
Okrand gave us this word 7/18/1999 on the NEWS list he very
rarely visits. There, he said:
********************************************************
There is a Klingon word that could be translated "god" or
"supernatural being": <Qun>.
In talking of times long ago (pre-Kahless?), Klingons mention
these beings, and there seem to have been a good number of them
(the plural of <Qun> is <Qunpu'> since they are or were
presumably capable of using language, which is what the plural
suffix <-pu'> implies). Though too little is known of ancient
Klingon theology, there doesn't seem to have been a single <Qun>
that stood out from the rest. Indeed, the <Qunpu'> appear to
have acted collectively.
<Qunpu'> are distinct from <qa'pu'> "spirits" (such as the
spirits of the dishonored dead which reside at Gre'thor).
<Qun'a'> "great god" (<Qun> plus <-'a'>, the augmentative
suffix) may or may not be an appropriate translation for a
single supernatural being in a monotheistic system, since the
<Qun'a'> would still be one among many.
********************************************************
This is one of the words I have in my updated "New Words List"
that I still can't post because the server still won't accept
FTP submissions. Soon, it should be there. One hopes that Holtej
and ~mark will tell me as soon as I can post this.
> HoSghajchu'mo' Qun'a'Heyvam meqna' ghajnISbe'law'.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> chaq HeghDujDaq Qun HoH. narghlaHbe'
> ^^^
>
> 3) does this make any sense?
>
> “bIralchugh, pagh DarIn jatlh SoSwI’”
My mom says that you can't finish anything if you are violent.
[Is this like having her say that you can't have desert if you
don't finish your vegetables?]
> “toH. ‘e’ luSovchugh [Carthage] veng vavpu' ([Carthage]
> DevwI’pu'), Quch, vIbej*. qatlh ‘oH ja’be’ SoSlI’. qatlh ‘oH
> tIja’be’.
[Note that it is a bad thing to insert sentences between {'e'}
and the two sentences linked by it. The {toH.} here is probably
not a good thing.] "So. If the fathers and leaders of the city
of Carthage and a forehead knows this, I am sure it." [This
seems a bit odd.] [The next sentence is unintelligible, since I
know of no way to combine a imperative command and a question,
as you have done, and gain any meaning out of it, plus you've
used {-be'} instead of {-Qo'} in with a verb with an imperative
prefix. I'm guessing you didn't mean to use {tI-} and perhaps
instead meant to use {cho-} meaning "Why didn't you tell me
this?"
> “qaHagh! Qaw’pu [Carthage], luSov Hoch.”
"I laugh you. Carthage has destroyed, everybody knows it."
Okay. Though this doesn't say KLBC, I'm judging by the nature of
the errors so far, this is something pagh likely would prefer to
handle...
> “DaSovbe’law’. DaSovmo’, Sanmeychaj cherchu’pu’qu’ jaghmey
> ral, Dajatlh’a’? ‘a bIH neH qaqunbe’. qech QijlaH’be’ ‘ej
> Dogh vItIgh. reH Hevetlh(?) jIvang. ‘bIralchugh, pagh DarIn’
> ‘oH ngebba’ ‘ej mIghqu’ paQDI’norgh. DaHarchugh, [Napoleon
> Bonapart] qo’ [Wellington] joH qo’ je Daja’ vIqeS.
> lungachlaH. [Hitler] qo’ noHlaH’. yaywI’ luwIvlaH’ [Dodo]
> [Great Auk] [Passenger Pigeon] je. bIralmo’, bIghobmo’
> Dochmey Dawuqbej. jaS bIDachugh, pagh DarIn. (bIralchugh,
> bISuvchugh, Dochmey Dawuq law, Dachu’ghach pIm Dawuq puS.)
> vuD latlh ‘oH DaHarchugh, bInaj. vIt’a’vam lIjDI’ mutmey,
> Hegh ‘ej toy’moH."
>
> * is used in its slang meaning. In a couple of places I have
> done alternate translation. Those are in parenthesis. I am
> still not very confident at this, and this is a bit more
> liberal than I used to.
>
> Ben (DraQoS)
charghwI'