tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 18 17:18:51 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey
From: "...Paul" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > ghuy'cha'! Hol ram 'oH tlhIngan Hol'e' chay' 'e' DaHarlaH? Hamlet'e'
> > mughlu' rIntaH jay'! paghmo' tIn mIS'e' lInglu'ta' 'e' vIboQ jIH'e'!
> > jatmeyvaD qonpu' ghot law'!
> "paghmo' tIn mIS'e' lInglu'ta' 'e' vIboQ jIH'e'" --
> "I assisted the production of confusion because of a big nothing?"
> mu'tlheghlIj vIyajbe'.
/paghmo' tIn mIS/ is the name of the KLI's second Shakespearean translation,
"Much Ado about Nothing." I apologize for not marking it as a proper noun.
> You can transcribe anything in rot13 if you really wanted to, but rot13
> will continue to be a "toy encryption".
pImchu' ngoq Hol je!
> What if tomorrow Okrand got hit by a bus?
Why not deal with that when it happens? Why do you want to turn our hobby
into a committee-run bureacracy? "All in favor of /'I''a'/ meaning
'Almighty Sarlac?' Aye! Motion passes! Now on to the Suffix
Appropriations Subcommitte . . . ."
Basically, you've reached the point where you're saying to yourself, "What's
the point?" Speaking the language IS the point. You really can use the
language to talk about just about anything you want, even computer science,
but you must accept that we don't have access to any Klingons to tell us
You can go the route of the Interstellar Language School, and say, "I
declare that such-and-such to be an acceptable and correct way to say
whatchamacallit," but who are you to make that declaration? Enough of those
declarations, and you'll soon be totally incomprehensible to everyone, or
else you'll have to convince everyone that YOUR special terms should be
accepted by them.
> > yInbej tlhIngan Hol!
> 'ach Holvam 'ItlhchoHmoHlu''a'? nenchoH 'Iv?
The fiction is that Klingon is a real language that we're trying to learn,
and that we need information from Klingons. If you don't like that game,
you're going to have to build your own sandbox, and try to convince other
people to play in it. Hopefully, someone else won't come up with a BETTER
sandbox than yours.
> > pIq'e' DaleghlaHbogh SoH poQbe'bej tlhIngan Hol. yIjeS; yInvetlh yImuv.
> "Klingon definitely doesn't need you who can see the future."
/'e'/ can be used to mark the head noun of a relative clause that also
contains a noun that is not its head (HolQeD Vol. 4, No. 2, p. 6). And
explicitly stating a pronoun that would usually be dropped is done for
emphasis (THE KLINGON DICTIONARY, p. 60).
"Klingon definitely doesn't need a future that YOU can see."
> Hol pIq bonabbe'chugh QIt Hegh Hol 'e' Danabbej.
pIq Danabpu'bogh parchugh vay' Qoch 'e' Dachaw''a'? qar 'Iv?
> vay' woQ vInIH 'e' vInIDbe'. Hol pIqvaD nab QaQ wIchennISmoH 'e'
Don't put that Type 7 suffix on the second verb of the Sentence as Object
construction (TKD p. 66)!
nab chennISmoH 'Iv? 'ej nab chenmoHlu'chugh, qatlh Marc Okrand SaHlu'?