tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 21 12:34:02 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon Poetry for College (2nd attempt)
- From: "Mo Dean" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Klingon Poetry for College (2nd attempt)
- Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 15:33:42 -0500
Did the poem itself seem to be 'Klingon' in nature? That's what I was
trying for. I also thank you for your suggestions on gramar. Since the
plural suffix isn't really required, I left it off at certain places. Maybe
now I can try another poem.
T'Lod
-----Original Message-----
From: William H. Martin <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, November 21, 1999 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: Klingon Poetry for College (2nd attempt)
>On Sun, 21 Nov 1999 03:00:20 -0500 Mo Dean
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> qen "Illiteracy" yejHaDghomwIj QonoS vIqonnIS, 'ej
>> tlhIngan Hol vIlo'ta' 'e' vIwuq. vuDraj HIja'.
>> boparHa''a'?
>
>batlh bIvangqang. batlh bIvanglaH'a'? bInIDtaHchugh Data'.
>
>> T'Lod
>>
>> In Klingon:
>>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>>
>> qonta' *tu'loD *roy' puqloD
>>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>> yIghojmoHchu' tIghmeychaj mojnISmo' tIghmaj
>
>choHbe'nIS tIghmaj. choHnIS tIghchaj. vaj tIghmaj mojnIS
>tIghchaj. vaj:
>
>tIghmaj lumojmeH tIghmeychaj tIghojmoHchu'
>
>> tugh qa'meHpu'ma' moj chaH
>>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>> chaH poQ pIq law''e'
>
>nuqjatlh? I honestly don't know how to say, "The future
>depends on them" in Klingon. I think it is an odd abstract
>concept that would require a more specific statement to be
>meaningful. What do you mean by "the future"? That is at
>least as vague as the English noun "love".
>
>> taHmeH quv'e' tIghmaj SovnIS
>
>Assuming that {tIghmaj} is plural, right? Otherwise
>{luSovnIS}.
>
>> batlh yInmeH mIw DI'aghnIS
>
>Assuming {mIw} is plural, right?
>
>> mataHmeH maH'e' tIghmaj SovnIS chaH'e'
>
>Assuming that tIghmaj is plural, or {luSovnIS}.
>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>> laDmeH 'ej qonmeH mIw yI'agh
>> ghojwI' nIvqu' qonwI' nIvqu' joq moj chaH'e'
>> batlh yInmeH mIw yI'agh
>> DevwI' nIvqu' moj chaH'e'
>> QubmeH 'ej ghojmeH mIw yI'agh
>> puqpu'chaj ghojmoHmeH mIw yI'agh je
>
>maj. yap.
>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>> wIchenmoHbogh qo'Daq QapnISchu'
>
>tlha'chuqHa' mu'meylIj. nuq wIchenmoH?
>
>> mataHmeH maSachnIS
>
>net Sov.
>
>> tIghmaj puqpu' DIghojnISmoH
>
>puqpu'vaD tIghmaj DIghojnISmoH. A lot of people don't like
>this construction, but the simple truth is, this is the
>only way Okrand has ever shown us to handle putting {-moH}
>on a verb that already has a direct object. Your method
>throws two nouns in the direct object position with no
>explanation as to which one is the direct object and what
>is the other one doing in the sentence?
>
>You do use the {XvaD Y ZmoH} construction later in your
>poem.
>
>> mataHmeH no'chaj tIghmey lughojnISmoH puqpu'ma'
>
>ghojnISmoH. <<lu->> yInop.
>
>> tIghpu'maj ghojmoHbe'chugh maHeghbej
>
>ghojbe'chugh. <<-moH>> yInop.
>
>> mavon'eghlu'pu'be' neH, 'ach Hoch qorDu'ma' je DIlon
>
>luj <<mavon'eghlu'pu'be'>>. <<maX'eghlu'>> is gibberish.
>{-'egh} and {-lu'} do mutually exclusive, perverse things
>to the verb's prefix and they do not combine well at all.
>
>You are working too hard to overstretch the usefulness of
>{vonlu'} to adapt to the somewhat idiomatic English term
>"We fail ourselves". Then you say that we capture our
>families. Just use {lujchu'} or even just {luj}, or forget
>about {'egh} and say {wIvonlu'pu'be'} and then {qorDu'ma'
>je DIvonmoHlu'}. I'm not wild about this latter option, but
>it works better than what you now have. In fact, after
>thinking more, I think my suggestion here is probably
>highly controversial. Stick with {luj}.
>
>Realize that {neH} after a verb means "merely". Only when
>it follows a noun does it mean "only" as in "exclusively".
>
>> puqpu'lI'vaD nugh tIghmey DaghojmoHbe'chugh, bIvonlu'pu'
>
>maj.
>
>> ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH
>>
>> In DIvI' Hol:
>> Care about your students
>> by James Johnson
>>
>> Care about your students
>> Teach them well because our ways must become theirs.
>> They will replace us soon.
>>
>> Care about your students
>> The future depends on them
>> If honor is to survive, they must know our ways
>> We must show them how to live
>> If we are to survive, they must know our ways
>>
>> Care about your students
>> Show them how to read and write
>> That they might be great scholars or poets
>> Show them how to be honorable
>> That they might be great leaders
>> Show them how to think and learn
>> That they might also show their children as well
>>
>> Care about your students
>> They must be able to function in the world we created
>> In order to survive we must expand
>> Our ways must be passed on to our children
>> In order to continue, our children must learn the ways of their ancestors
>>
>> If they fail to learn our ways, we will die
>> We will have failed not only ourselves, but all our families.
>> Those who do not teach their children the ways of our society have
already failed.
>>
>> Care about your students.
>>
>> I tried to get as close as I could when translating from
>> the Klingon.
>
>You have pointed exactly to what I think is the core
>problem most people have in translation. When you say "I
>have tried to get as close as I could..." what you are
>really referring to is that you have tried to stick to the
>same grammar and vocabulary, rather than trying to stick to
>the same meaning. If you could say things that better
>reflected the meaning of a sentence, you chose not to do
>that, but instead tried to use the same kind of clauses and
>grammar and you tried to keep the same vocabulary.
>
>I think it is much more important to make the wording of
>both languages flow better, so long as the statements in
>both languages point to a common meaning. This is more
>useful for those trying to help you know if you have
>expressed yourself clearly.
>
>> I took a few liberties only to make the
>> English flow more smoothly. If these weren't correct,
>> please tell me so I don't repeat myself.
>
>I LIKED when you did this. I think this is a GOOD thing. If
>the English states what you MEANT, then we can read the
>Klingon and tell you if it says that same thing.
>
>> Qapla'
>>
>> T'Lod
>
>charghwI'
>
>