tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 25 20:29:59 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: To do or not to do...
I'm going to join in on the ramblings and describe the problem as I see
it...
I think one thing you didn't take into account is that a lot of the verbs in
English have Klingon verb that are similar in meaning but not in name, and
unless you have a big Klingon vocabulary your not going to know they are
there. The idea of to do and ta' for instance, ta' fitted perfectly for what
I wanted, but when I was translating the verb to do, to accomplish didn't
come near my mind. It wasn't vagueness, it was due to my lack of vocab, and
I think this tends to be a large problem a lot of the time. I understand
Klingon grammar pretty well and can go from Klingon to English quickly, as
long as I have my TKD to look up words, but going the other way is harder
because as I translate I have to think of every possible English word that
could be used to mean the same thing and then I have to look each one up.
Then once I find it (if I find one), I have 50 English words in my head and
one Klingon one... once I've used it, it doesn't want to stay in my brain
for long.
What you see as vagueness, I see as a simply not know what words I have to
play with. Until I have memorized all 2000 odd words, I'm going to have to
ask questions which seem like vagueness to you, but to me are simply lack
vocab. Which is why I thought this list was here. So that those that have
gone before, and I must commend them all, can help lead us willing, but a
little slower, people along the path. I'm not saying spoon feed us, just
help us take the right paths as we go and deal with our vagueness, we are
doing our best :-)
Geese, way to many "vagueness"es in there... and I repeated myself a little
too much, but anyway, on to other things.
That aside, does anyone have any tips for learning vocab? I've tried
translating things on the list, and I remember words for a few days but then
they seem to float out of my brain. I've tried ter'eS's great kliflash
program, but the same thing happens. Any other suggestions?
qurgh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Will Martin" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 4:20 PM
Subject: re: To do or not to do...
> ghunchu'wI' already answered this well in terms of specific suggestions
for
> these examples. I just want to add a bit of discussion about the root of
> the problem. The root is that English allows us to say things that are so
> vague that you can't translate them into Klingon without getting more
> specific. The whole "How do I say, 'I love you,'?" thread that pops up
> every year or so is a perfect example.
>
> When faced with this, stop trying to translate the vague, abstract concept
> that the English is saying and come up with a specific instance of your
> idea in use in the real world. Pull in context. What is the specific
> context of the statement you want to make in this specific instance? Don't
> look for a generic way to say the vague thing. There isn't one. That's
just
> not the way Klingon works.
>
> It flips back the other way when translating as well. Some beginners get
> upset about Klingon because we commonly leave out words that you'd expect
> if you were writing in English. Often you need context to know whether a
> potentially transitive verb has a direct object or not, like:
>
> leghchoH.
>
> That doesn't tell us much, but if I say:
>
> loD bejtaH 'avwI'. ghoS loD. leghchoH.
>
> We know that the man just visually noticed the guard. The guard had been
> watching the man for some time.
>
> Meanwhile, if I said:
>
> pa' wovqu'vo' tlheD SuvwI'. wej lIS mInDu'lIj. loS. leghchoH.
>
> Now, we know that the warrior began to see. No particular direct object
> here.
>
> So, it is easy for a beginner to be bothered by this vagueness in Klingon
> concerning who is doing what.
>
> This is a key difference between the two languages. Sometimes Klingon is
> vague about who is doing what and you have to figure that out from
context.
> leghchoH. We know exactly what is happening. We just don't necessarily
know
> exactly who is doing it or to whom it is being done.
>
> Meanwhile, in English, we are often vague about exactly what we are doing,
> though we much more commonly are specific about who is doing it. "I love
> you." We know I'm doing it and we know I'm doing it to you, but then
again,
> exactly what am I doing? Am I feeling fondly toward you as a sibling or
> parent or as my child? Am I lusting after you as a potential mate? Am I
> just looking for a favor? Am I appreciating a favor you just did? Do I
just
> like you a whole lot? Am I trying to get you into my bed or my bowling
> team? Do I want to build a home where we both can live, or am I just
> looking for a date this Saturday? Well, until we have more context, we
> don't know.
>
> This is a big piece of what I mean when I say that English is noun-centric
> and Klingon is verb-centric. If I walk up to you and say in English,
> "Telephone," that is a lone noun and you understand it as a complete
> sentence. You know that there is a telephone call for you and I'd like you
> to go to the phone. If I walk up to a Klingon and say {ghogh HablI'}, he
> will look at me like I'm an idiot.
>
> In English, we say, "FAX it to me." FAX is a device. It is a noun. We use
> it as a verb, but it really is a noun. We verbify nouns all the time
> because in English, we think a lot about nouns and verbs are there pretty
> much just to fill in the gaps between our nouns.
>
> In Klingon, a verb is a sentence. Nouns are there just to clear up a few
> minor details. Action is everything, and we want to know a lot about the
> action. That's why nouns get five types of suffix and verbs get nine, plus
> rovers. My version of the word list has 984 verbs in it and 1250 nouns.
> Meanwhile, the nouns include proper names, and each verb has many more
> meanings because of the suffixes. This gives us a LOT more ways to express
> a verbal concept than there are to express nouns. I would expect an
English
> dictionary to have a LOT more nouns than verbs in it.
>
> But I'm rambling.
>
> When you don't know how to express a verb in Klingon, most typically this
> is because the English verb is either so vague that Klingon requires that
> you get more specific about what you mean, or the English word is of a
> class of jargon that is isolated to a topic that Klingon has not grown
into
> yet, as did cooking and music words before KGT.
>
> pItlh.
>
> charghwI'
>
> > From: "qurgh lungqIj" <[email protected]>
> > Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 01:44:44 -0500
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I've been sitting thinking about this for nearly an hour and I can work
> > it out...
> >
> > How do you translate setances that have "to do" in them?
> >
> > eg What do you want to do? or I have things to do or I'll do it
> >
> > I thought about recasting them, but I couldn't work out what to recast
> > them too...
> >
> > qurgh
> >
>
>
>