tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 13 09:07:29 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Tao Te Ching Chp. 66
> jatlhtaHvIS toy'wI'chaj DanIS. [A]
I was confused for a while because I read /DanIS/ as prefix-verb instead of
verb-suffix.
> 'ej naDtaHvIS not Doy'choH.
This doesn't seem right.
I haven't come up with an alternative yet, but I think it needs to be changed.
> [A] While the Chinese text allows for the master and servant interpretation
> it literally talks about the sage being "above" and "below" the people.
>
> However, I have no idea if UP and DOWN metaphors, so widespread in Terran
> languages, would work in Klingon. That's why I decided against the
> following rendition:
>
> vaj nuv DungDaq ratlhqangchugh yajchu'wI'
> jatlhtaHvIS nuv bIngDaq ratlhnIS.
>
> Thus if the sage wishes to be above the people
> he must in his words remain below them.
When I see Dung and bIng I think of the physical relation; but without
Dung/bIng you lose the connection with the seas and rivers being below the
valleys.
Klingon does use the metephores about ceiling/maximum, etc.
> ghoHbe'mo' ghaH, ghaHmo' [B] ghoHlaH pagh.
> Since he does not contend, no one can contend against [B] him.
>
> [B] {ghaHmo'} really means "because of him". I hope its meaning can be
> stretched a little. If not, the line will have to be changed into
> something like {ghoHbe'mo' ghaH, ghaH jeymeH ghoHlaH pagh.}
How about qaD?
DloraH