tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 22 20:11:24 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: HochlIj waw'pu' maH wIghaj

Thus SarrIS:

S>I can understand why this writer chose to remain anonymous. The Klingon is 
S>REALLY BAD. The subject header is impenetrable gibberish. I'm guessing it 
S>was supposed to be {Hoch waw'meylIj DIjeyta'}

Yes, that's a better translation of it.  Better than yours later, actually,
as I'll get to.  Yes, the Klingon was bad.  As you've discovered, it was
supposed to be.

S>Perhaps we should report them as making "inappropriate use" of the 
S>anonymous Email.

Not at all!  This list is for discussing things about or IN Klingon!  The
letter was unmistakably IN KLINGON, albeit bad Klingon.  Not worse than
what we've seen from some newcomers.  On the contrary, this was *entirely*
appropriate use.

S>> jar cha'SaD wa'vatlh wa'Daq
S>> taghtaH veS
S>
S>A year is not a place. It doesn't take {Daq}. {taghtaH} is an interesting 
S>verb and suffix combination worthy of philosophical exploration. Likely, 
S>{taghtaH veS} suffers from word order reversal, since most likely {veS} is 
S>the process which is begun and not the entity beginning an unnamed
S>process.

Not so fast.  We have canon {taghbej mu'qaD veS}.  You can have {tagh}'s
subject be the process that has commenced.

Qov adds: 

Q>The suffix -Daq isn't called for here, but it is used at all, and it is put
Q>where it would go, if it belonged there.  A common rote translation is to
Q>use -taH for English -ing.  So perhaps "In the year 2101, the war was
Q>beginning." was intended. We both assumed 2101 is a year rather than a
Q>month, but it could be a month, for a sense of alien-ness.  The
Q>substitution of jar (month) for DIS (year) is not an alphabetical lookup
Q>error and not an error a UT sophisticated enough to create this would make.
Q> It is either a memory error -- implying an author who has a memorized
Q>vocabulary -- or a deliberate error, to introduce strangeness to the piece.

Interesting!  In fact, it *was* a memory error.  The English is more or
less correct there, so the Klingon didn't need to be wrong.

Oh, didn't I mention that I wrote it?

S>> HoD: nuq qaS?
S>
S>Reversed word order.

"What happen?"  Not much you can do in Klingon to show that the grammar is
off except for messing up the word order.  Maybe I should have put a bad
suffix on instead.

S>> yaS: jorwI' macherbeHlu'pu'
S>
S>{ma-lu'} is a meaningless combination of affixes. The {-beH} requires that 
S>the subject of the verb is a device. I'm guessing that the intended text 
S>was something like {jorbeH jan. wIcherta'.}

And SarrIS' attempted "correction":

S>>MECHANIC: Someone set us up the bomb.
S>
S>jormeH jan wIcherlu'.

I don't think that's right either.  Frankly, the English is practically
meaningless anyway (in fact, the text is really "Somebody set up us the
bomb."  Not "set us up."  That's even more nonsensical).  The implication
here, I think, is that someone somehow set a bomb and blew something of
"ours" up.  It's not good news.

S>> yaS: marI'lu'
S>
S>Again, {ma-lu'} is gibberish. {wIrI'lu'}.

Trying to keep the screwup of "we get signal."

S>> HoD: nuq !
S>> yaS: chu' jIH'a'
S>
S>I'm guessing the word order is wrong. {jIH'a' chu'} could be clipped for 
S>{jIH'a' yIchu'!} Right now, it means something like "The major display 
S>engages (something)."

"Main screen turn on."  Sort of cave-man-ish, but again, the easiest thing
to do in Klingon is fudge the word-order.

S>> HoD: SoH !!

Or in SarrIS' version:

S>>CAPTAIN:  It's you!!
S>
S>SoH 'oH!   {{:)>

I decided against {SoH 'oH}.  In my opinion, it (probably) isn't good
Klingon.  It's an idiom in English, and I don't know that it should
translate.  Since the English, though, was actually okay, I decided the
Klingon deserved to be good also.

S>> CATS: nuqneH qaHpu'

SarrIS': 

S>>CATS:     How are you gentlemen!!
S>
S>Dotlhraj tI'angneS.

No... It wasn't a question.  It was a greeting, and a sarcastic one at
that.  {nuqneH} is kind of weak for it, but it's the best there is.
Translating it as an honest request for information misses that.  CATS is
the enemy.

S>> CATS: HochlIj waw'pu' maH wIghaj
S>
S>Gibberish.

S>>           All your base are belong to us.
S>
S>wa' waw'lIj naQ DISeH.

No.  You were right at the top: it's supposed to be {Hoch waw'meyraj
DIjeyta'}.  Remember that Japanese doesn't mark its nouns in plural
(presumably this was written by a Japanese-speaker; it's true of other
Asian languages too).  This was an attempt at "All your bases belong to
us."  The plural went to the verb, which was done badly too.

Qov:

Q>
Q>Not really.  
Q>HoD: You!! (in surprise at seeing the CATS on the screen)
Q>CATS: Hello, gentlemen.  (No, nuqneH doesn't mean that, but a BG has seen
Q>it like that a thousand times.  Note the correct plural.  Could be a
Q>mistype for qoHpu'.)
Q>CATS: We have all your bases (As you surmised from the subject of the
Q>message).
Q>
Q>Again we have a correct suffix, placed on the wrong word, and an incorrect
Q>suffix that is not a common beginner error.  Pretending this is a beginner
Q>who has just looked up the -pu' from qaHpu', can he have forgotten this
Q>quickly that there was a choice in plurals, and that the one he chose was
Q>for people?  Or is he throwing in a random incorrect plural.  Personally I
Q>would have used the body parts plural -Du' to make it sound really weird,
Q>but perhaps the document being translated isn't *that* weird.

Dropping the plural like in English wouldn't work, because Klingon doesn't
require it.  So I had to go with a wrong pluralizer.  I considered -Du',
but yes, that would have been a little too much.

S>> CATS: QIH DaghoS
S>
S>This is perhaps an interesting way of saying, "You are on the path to 
S>distruction."

The English wasn't too bad, though I think the Klingon isn't good at all.
It just worked out OK.  Oh, of course, I had the wrong "you"; plural would
have been better.  SarrIS went with {QIH boghoS}; were I doing a "good"
translation I might have said {tugh boQIHlu'} (mm, a little roundabout) or
something.

S>> HoD: Dajatlh nuq !!
S>
S>Either this is a direct quote to the effect of: "You say it, 'What?'" or 
S>the word order or prefix is hosed. Better to just say {nuqjatlh?}

But then it wouldn't have reflected the wrongness of "what you say!?"

S>> CATS: DuHbe' SutaH poHraj yIta'
S>
S>More jibberish. I see three main verbs in one sentence with no grammar to 
S>explain it. The general sense is something like {SutaHlaHbe'.} Note that 
S>the speaker keeps slipping back and forth between talking to an individual 
S>and a group.

Yeah.  Bad grammar, isn't it? :)

S>>CATS:     You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha....
S>
S>SutaHlaHbe'bej poHlIj yIchenmoH. Ha ha ha ha....

I probably would have left it at {SutaHlaHbe'} or something.  The "make
your time" is utterly meaningless in the English.  I have no idea what it's
supposed to mean.

Q>My first theory here was that the CATS are law enforcement and the time
Q>referred to is jail time.  The HoD and yaS have been caught in the act of
Q>preparing to blow something up.  But the following line of presumably evil
Q>laughter confuses me.

Nah; CATS is the bad guy saying they've conquered everything.

S>> CATS: HA HA HA HA
S>> HoD: Hoch "zig" yIteq
S>
S>"Take off each zig!"? This is perfectly grammatical and meaningless.

S>>CAPTAIN:  Take off every 'Zig'!!
S>
S>Hoch *Zig* yIpuvmoH!!

I would have used {SaqHa'}, actually.  I was quite surprised that there
really wasn't a word for "take off, launch, take to the air."  I almost
used {SaqHa'} in the "bad" version, since {teq} was a really bad mistake,
but I thought it would be too sophisticated a construction for the "novice
translator" look I wanted.

S>> HoD: nuq bota' boSov
S>
S>More gibberish. Two main verbs and a question word as direct object with no 
S>grammar to hold them together. Wild guess here: {nuq bota'pu'?} "What have 
S>you accomplished?"

Again, trying to keep with the missing verb in the English {you know what
you doing}.

S>> HoD: "zig" vIH
S>
S>"A moving zig"?

It's almost okay clipped Klingon, actually, except for the transitivity of
{vIH}.

S>> HoD: ruv'a'vaD
S>
S>Great justice is the indirect object of a missing sentence.

I note you did no different in your version. :)

Qov saw what ghunchu'wI' did as well, though he caught it immediately.

Q>In immediate (we're talking 14 minutes) follow up to that posting,
Q>ghunchu'wI' provided an explanation.  It's a translation of some sort of
Q>dialogue from a gaming console.
Q>
Q>ghunchu'wI'
Q>> I'm sufficiently out of the console gaming world to understand this at all,
Q>> but I do recognize it, and I am astonished by how "well" it has been
Q>> translated.
Q>
Q>So I set out to find what exactly ghunchu'wI' was commending himself for.
Q>(wa'logh mutojchu' ghunchu'wI'.  jIQeHbe', mutoj 'e' vItIv, 'a DaH
Q>vIghuH). 

But of course, it wasn't him this time. :)


Someone showed me the Flash song/movie the other day, and it ate my brain
for a day or two.  I found websites that had dozens of altered pictures
with the slogan(s) looking perfectly normal in all sorts of places (street
signs, buildings... more than what's in the movie).  And I laughed myself
silly, wondering all the time "why is this so damn funny!?"  I still don't
know why I thought so.  And it had to be done in Klingon.

I even have a picture of the KLI emblem that reads "All your base are
belong to us" (instead of "Klingon Language Institute")... Still have to
putter with it some more.

~mark

Back to archive top level