tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 03 02:51:26 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: -lu' and -be', small aside on Paul Simon

lab Voragh:

>tulwI' (Stephan) wrote:
>>>   'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH
>>>   It waits...on the edge of the galaxy, beside a passage to 
>>>unknown regions of
>>>    the universe... (SkyBox DS99)
>>could anyone help me to parse this sentence?
>>'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH => in order that one travels 
>>to the regions of the universe that one doesn't know
>You have it right:
>'u' Sepmey Sovbe'lu'bogh = the universe's unknown regions ("regions 
>which one doesn't know")
>SepmeyDaq lunglu'meH = in order to travel to (the) regions
>>He ghoSlu'bogh = a route that one approaches
>>retlhDaq 'oHtaH = it "waits" in the area beside
>>it's not a sentence. what's wrong?
>It is a sentence, but you've broken it up in the wrong place:
>   ... He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH.
>   It is (located) next to ["at the area beside"] the route which proceeds...

but why no /He ghoSbogh/ - "the route that proceeds"?
what does /ghoS/ acutally mean? "to follow a route"?

>The basic sentence is
>   He retlhDaq 'oHtaH
>   It is (located) next to the route
>Note that the actual subject of the verbs {loS} "it waits" and 
>{'oHtaH} "it is (located)" is only stated at the very end of the 
>next sentence: {logh Hop Hut tengchaH} "space station Deep Space 
>Here is the complete text of SkyBox's DEEP SPACE NINE, 1993 SERIES: 
>CARD 99 (Published in HolQeD 3.2:9):
>                                      Qu'
>                                 The Mission
>    loS...qIb HeHDaq, 'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh
>    retlhDaq 'oHtaH.  HaDlu'meH, QuSlu'meH, SuDlu'meH lojmIt Da logh Hop Hut
>    tengchaH.  vaj loghDaq lenglaHtaH Humanpu'.  veH Qav oH logh'e'.

oH -> 'oH

for practising, i made an esperanto translation. :)

"la misio: gxi atendas... cxe la egxo de galaksio, cxe la apudo de 
kurso, kiun oni dauxrigas por ke al la regionoj de la universo, kiujn 
oni ne konas, oni vojagxu, gxi estadas. por ke oni eksploru, por ke 
oni konspiru, por ke oni entreprenu, la pordegon rolas la kosmostacio 
forspaca nauxa. do al la kosmo povas vojagxadi la homoj. la lasta 
fino estas ja la kosmo."

>   "It waits...on the edge of the galaxy, beside a passage to unknown regions
>    of the universe, space station Deep Space Nine is the gateway for the
>    exploration, intrigue and enterprise that mark the continuation of the
>    human adventure into space--the final frontier."  (card 01)

in DIvI'-esperanto it would be, probably:

"gxi atendas... cxe la egxo de la galaksio, apud pasejo al la 
nekonataj regionoj de la universo, la kosmostacio forspaca nauxa 
estas la haveno por ekspori, konspiri kaj entrepreni por ke la homoj 
plu vojagxu al la kosmo, la lasta limo."

>Note that Okrand translated one fairly complex English sentence 
>(provided to him by the people at SkyBox) by four shorter Klingon 
>sentences - including the famous opening words of the original Star 
>Trek series.

by the way, is MO himself a trekkie?

>The SkyBox cards are the only examples of what we might call 
>advanced or formal, literary Klingon.  Unfortunately, these texts 
>are all rather short - only two to four sentences - and far too rare.
>>>The only example of {-lu'be'} I can find is:
>>>   SuvwI'pu' qan tu'lu'be'
>>>   There are no old warriors. TKW
>>>Note that {tu'lu'} "there is, there are" is a bit irregular.  The 
>>>above TKW example is the only example we have of a negated 
>>why "irregular"?
>Because {tu'lu'} "there are, there is" itself is a bit irregular, at 
>east in the way it's actually used.  Take, for example, the example 
>{naDev tlhInganpu' tu'lu'} "There are Klingons around here." 
>According to TKD's explanation of how the object prefixes work with 
>{-lu'} (p.39), one would expect {lutu'lu'}, i.e. {naDev tlhInganpu' 

i see.

>Looking at examples of {tu'lu'} in canon, many people have noticed 
>that Klingons apparently drop {lu-} colloquially.  Qov has called 
>this "the Klingon version of 'whom'."  In (North American) English, 
>most people use the word "who" as the direct object of a verb when 
>formally they should be using "whom", much like most Klingons say 
>{tu'lu'} when they should be saying {lutu'lu'}.  BTW, this usage was 
>confirmed by Okrand at qep'a' loSDIch, who was quite taken with her 
>idea.  He later expanded and explained it in some detail in KGT in 
>the section called "Common Errors: The Case of {lu-}" (pp. 168-172).

i remember that i have read this in a book called "the language 
instinct". one of your former presidents had to decide between two 
slogans: "whom you gonna vote" and "who you gonna vote". something 
like that.


Back to archive top level