tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 19 17:51:46 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
mu'qaD veS (was Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey)
On Tue, 19 Nov 2002, David Trimboli wrote:
> > qo' DaleghmeH qechlIj wuv. ("It depends on how you look at the world?")
>
> "[It] depends on your idea for seeing the world."
> "In order that you see the world, [it] depends on your idea."
>
> What is "it" in this instance? In Klingon, you can't make a sentence "it"
> (as you can make it an object with /'e'/ or /net/), and it can't be general
> (that's /-lu'/), except in a couple of cases like weather terms where
> they're used more like exclamations than like sentences (e.g., /SIS/ "It's
> raining"). You really have to specify WHAT depends on that.
Also like { qay'be' }?
> You want to recast this. Although I don't think this one is best, here's an
> attempt to keep the metaphor, and to keep it general:
>
> potlh qo' DaleghmeH mIwlIj'e'.
> It's your process for seeing the world that's important.
Hmm... What if I just used { vIt } (n. truth) for "it", and tweak the {
legh } construction a bit to be more of a relative clause...
qo' DuleghmoHlaHbogh qechlIj wuv vIt
"Truth depends on your ideas which allow you to see the world."
No, I don't like that one either, though I think using the word { vIt }
speaks more towards the phrase. "It depends on how you look at it" really
refers to "truth", either in general or, as in this case, the truth of the
context. Is there a clean way in Klingon to represent "how" as a pronoun
rather than a question word? Ooo, how about getting really metaphorical:
vIt Danejbogh wuv vIt Daleghbogh
"The truth you see depends on the truth you look for."
Ooo, I really like that one. I hope I got the syntax right -- I don't
need any extra { -'e' }'s because there's only a single noun for each {
-bogh } clause, right?
> > 'obe' chaHchugh rIp'e' quv, teHchoH mu' luchenmoHbogh.
>
> Ack! Well, an /'obe'/ and a /rIp/ are both /'oH/, not /chaH/. They are
> made up of people who are /chaH/, but they themselves are /'oH/. Also, when
> using a verb adjectivally (/quv/, above), any Type 5 suffix used on the noun
> is shifted over to the verb: /rIp quv'e'/ "honored council."
Doh, I forgot { -'e' } was Type 5! I'll never get that one right. :P
Where is the rule that says things like { 'obe' } takes { 'oH } and not {
chaH }? TKD says { chaH } is used when referring to a group of beings
capable of using language. In this case, the { 'obe' } fits that
description. Although I can see a perfectly good reason for it, I'm just
wondering where I missed it.
> 'obe' 'oHchugh rIp quv'e', teHchoH mu' chenmoHbogh.
> "If the honored council is an official government order, the words they make
> begin to be true."
>
> qum 'oHbe'bej tlhIngan Hol yejHaD'e'!
What's the Klingon for "canon"? ;) I think I got pretty close to "If the
honrable council is official, the words they make become official." I was
looking for a good way to express the concept of "real"/"reality" Oh,
duh, I just realized I could do that with { ngebHa' } :P
ngebHa'chugh rIp quv'e', ngebHa'choH mu' chenmoHbogh
Better?
> > rIp DalajHa'mo'
> > SoHvaD teHbe' mu'vetlh'.
>
> ngugh qar 'Iv?
qarba' jIH'e'! ;)
> maj. maghoHtaH vIneHbe', 'a majoptaHchugh 'ej maway'taHchugh 'ej vaj laHlIj
> DaDubchugh, QaQ ghu'. toH! jIqarchu' jay'! bImujchu'qu'! Hab SoSlI'
> Quch!!
Ha' mu'qaD veS wItagh! bagh'egh DaQlIj 'e' yIchaw'Qo' ;)
...Paul
** Have a question that reality just can't answer? **
** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
"Understanding human needs is half the job of meeting them"
-- Adlai Stevenson