tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 20 17:00:35 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: DCKL translation problems: {tlhogh}

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

Voragh:
> >To divorce Quark in DS9 "House of Quark", Grilka shouted *N'Gos tlhogh
> >cha!* ("This marriage is dissolved!") at him.  So, *IF* we accept this
> >Paramount source (since we have nothing else), we ignore the all-purpose
> >particle *cha* - which the Paramount writers add to just about every
> >Klingon sentence they write - leaving us with the phrase *{tlhogh ngoS}
> >"dissolve the marriage" which is not a bad way of saying "divorce".

ghunchu'wI':
>Why did you (1) change the word order from "N'Gos tlhogh" to {tlhogh ngoS},
>and (2) change the phrasing from "it is dissolved" to "dissolve it"?

Except that {ngoS} is glossed only as "dissolve", not "be dissolved".  So 
rather than re-write the definition, I simply flipped the words.  If you 
figure that the writer simply looked up the words for "dissolve marriage", 
in that order, then you get {tlhogh ngoS} in proper {ta' Hol}.

>It seems to me that the DS9 usage would suggest {ngoS tlhogh} as the proper
>formula.

The English subtitle "This marriage is dissolved" would have to be {ngoSlu' 
tlhoghvam}.

Note: I wasn't trying to explain the traditional (?) {no' Hol} formula of 
{ngoS tlhogh cha!}, merely to come up with a relatively easy way to say 
"divorce" or "get divorced" based on Paramount screen "canon".  {tlhoghwIj 
vIngoSpu'} "I have dissolved my marriage" is one way to say "I've gotten a 
divorce, I've been divorced, I'm divorced, etc." in "modern" {ta' Hol}.

Of course, another (perhaps better) way might be to take the two marriage 
verbs and add {-Ha'} "undo" - *{nayHa'} and  *{SawHa'} - *IF* we knew how 
they were used.  (I.e. do they take objects, presumably the name of the 
person you're marrying?)



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level