tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 09 09:36:14 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Yet another translation.



> I'm not entirely sure if it works as I want it.
> The word "pagh" has many uses, among them the negation, like the word
> 'not' - is that correct? I hope so, because I used it that way.
>...
> Also, Id like to get rid off the "pagh" for it creates an unbalance.

Well, you can get rid of it because it's not quite what you thought it 
was.  /pagh/ is "zero, nothing, nobody"  It's not negation.  Negation is 
handled with suffixes, -be'; and depending how it's being used, sometimes -
Ha'.  We also have the adverbial /not/ "never".

 
> "tlhIngan Hol: DaghojtaH 'ach pagh DaghojlI'. "
> "Klingon: you can learn it, but you cannot finish learning it." 
> Meaning that you will have to learn forever in order to understand it.

Another tool we have is the suffix -'e' which we can put in place of that 
colon.  The -'e' in this manner sets the topic.
tlhIngan Hol'e' ...
"As for the Klingon language, ..."

As for /pagh DaghojlI'/, let's replace /pagh/ with the suffix -be'.
DaghojtaH 'ach DaghojlI'be'.
"You continuously learn it, but you will not finish learning it."

We can also use /not/ "never".  This goes at the beginning of the sentence 
which it is modifying.
DaghojtaH 'ach not DaghojlI'
"You continuously learn it, but you not finish learning it."

I think I would also remove the /'ach/.  It's not wrong, it can be in there.

tlhIngan Hol'e'; DaghojtaH, not DaghojlI'.
tlhIngan Hol'e'; DaghojtaH, DaghojlI'be'.


> The intended pun is the use of the two suffixes "-taH" and "-lI'",
> which both have a similiar meaning.

These, along with -pu' and -ta', can be fun.


> Maybe the order should be reversed, Im not quite sure.

tlhIngan Hol'e'; DaghojlI'be', DaghojtaH.

Both work.  It depends on the feel you want.


DloraH, BG


Back to archive top level