tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 04 10:01:54 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: Genesis 1:1-5
> > 1 mungDaq chal ghor je chenmoHta' Qun.
> > DungDaq leng Qun qa'.
> > 3 <<wovchoH>> jatlh Qun, 'ej ghIq wovchoHta'.
> > 4 'ej QaQ wovtaHghachvam 'e' legh Qun, 'ej wovtaHghachvam
> > HurghtaHghachvetlh je chev Qun.
> > 5 'ej wovtaHghachvaD <<pem>> pong Qun, HurghtaHghachvaD
> <<ram>> pong je;
> > choS tu'lu', ghIq po tu'lu' - wa' jaj.
> >
> > 2. I'm not comfortable with {mungDaq} since "In the
> beginning" refers
> > to both time and space (or neither, or just time - depends on one's
> > point of view), and {mungDaq} refers only to a location,
> sort of. Any
> > creative suggestions regarding {-vIS} or {-pa'}?
>
> I like {taghmeH}. I also prefer {yav} instead of {ghor}.
> {ghor} doesn't seem like a word an
> ancient culture woud use.
{tagh} certainly seems to be useful here, but {-meH}? I think the meaning
should be heaven and earth were made at the time of the beginning, not
exactly for its sake.
As for {yav} - didn't see that one, cool.
> > 2 'ej chenbe'pu' ghor 'ej chImpu' 'oH, 'ej Hurgh
> Qargh'a' bIS'ub, 'ej bIQ
> I really don't like {chenbe'} here. chay' chenbe'laH yav?
> chenbej; qen chenmoHta' Qun!
> There may simply be no way in Klingon to express the idea
> that something can be "made"
> and yet not yet have a form. Perhaps you might use use
> {narghmoH} in the first verse, but
> this is unsatisfying. Or perhaps use {'u'} in the first
> verse instead og {chal yav je}; after all,
> "heaven and earth" is just an idomatic expression that means
> all of creation.
>
> I have also heard the theory that the Hebrew should be
> translated "When God began to
> create the heavens and the earth, the earth was formless and
> empty". If this is the case,
> then there is no conflict between {chenmoH} and {chenbe'}.
Doh! Didn't notice that double use {chen}.
The Hebrew text is quite literal: "(1) In the beginning god created the
sky/skies and the earth. (2) And the earth was formless...". There is a
theological theory which I got to know when I translated this passage that
it shouldn't be read in as a linear story, that one can divide it into 2
separate and parallel story lines, meaning ultimately that verse 2 doesn't
really follow (chronologically) verse 1.
That being said, I think you're absolutely right. Even if it's correct, the
text should not be confusing for a native Klingon reader. The Hebrew/English
versions I've seen so far use different ways to describe the earth's
creation and its formless state.
As for {'u'} - isn't that just as "modern" as {ghor}? Maybe {ngeHbej}, hmm,
or something entirely different...
By the way, the term "heaven and earth" is indeed an idiom - even in Hebrew
- but the idiom originates exactly from this place. At least in this
particular instance it's meant quite literally, unlike other places that I
can't recall right now when even the bible uses it as an idiom ("heaven and
earth and all their armies" or something).
> > 4. {wovtaHghach} and {HurghtaHghach} seem very iffy because of the
> > {-taHghach} syndrome, but I can't think of a better re-phrasing...
>
> poH wov, poH Hurgh
I didn't regard the *time* of light/darkness as a good translation to the
light/darkness on its own, but the more I think about it the more
appropriate it seems. vIparHa'!
bIjaj