tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 27 08:13:23 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBG Translation assistance

Steven Boozer (

>>jorwI' - explosive

1LT veS joH:
>Is this word a noun or an adjective? [...]
>{chenHa'moH} "destroy (something)": could lead to {jorwI' luch
>chenHa'moH}. But that's using {jorwI'} as an adjective. Could someone
>clarify if {jorwI'} is a noun or adjective? 

1LT veS joH:
>Naturally leading to the literal translation of {jorwI'}: one (or thing) that explodes

Correct.  The noun-forming suffix {-wI'} can refer to people or things.  E.g. {So'wI'} "cloaking device":

TKD 20:  [{So'wI'}] comes from the verb {So'} cloak plus {-wI'} "thing which does". {So'wI'} is a "thing which cloaks." 

1LT veS joH:
>Question on the root of {jorwI'}: is that -wI': doer of the action, one
>that does said action? If so, would explode be {jor}? 

Exactly right:

  It explodes. KLS

KGT 56f.:  Ships are also equipped with an explosive weapon called a {peng}, usually translated as "torpedo", though "missile" might work just as well (...) The warhead of the torpedo is called its {jorneb} (which seems to contain the verb {jor} ["explode}] but is otherwise not analyzable).

BTW, we now know that {neb} means "beak, bill (of a bird)" (cf. HQ 10.4:4-5).  Cf. also {ngat} "gunpowder".

1LT veS joH:
>How would one say that something has explosive qualities, ie something 
>that could explode is explosive like something that could burn is flamable? 

If you want to discuss the explosive material itself, use {Hap} "matter (substance), element":  e.g. *{jormeH Hap} "matter for (the purpose of) exploding" or *{jorbogh Hap} "matter that explodes".  You could also use {-laH} "can, able":  {jorlaH Hapvam} "this substance can explode" (or more loosely, "this material is explosive").

lay'tel SIvten
>>"I came up with {jorwI' polHa'wI'} (discarder of explosive(s)) or 
>>{jorwI' Qaw'wI'} (destroyer of explosive(s))."

1LT veS joH:
>with the explosives. Just saying "Explosives Disposal" may suggest the
>idea that the team would remove the explosives to destroy them rather
>than destroying the entire item. That would be "rendering safe" instead
>of disposal. I think the translation of EOD would have 
>to be more of a description: perhaps- {jorwI' luch Qaw'ta'} (explosive
>equipment destruction). {Qaw'ta'} may be the wrong word there; (destroy)
>is a verb, so {Qaw'ta'} should be destroyed. However, (destruction) is a
>noun, so I am not sure what that word is.

Again, {jorwI'} is a noun.  Use a purpose clause or a relative clause:

  jormeH luch wIQaw'
  we destroy explosive equipment

  jorbogh luch wIQaw'
  we destroy exploding equipment

  jorlaHbogh luch wIQaw'
  we destroy equipment that can explode

{luch} "equipment, gear" feels like a collective noun;  consider {jan} "device" for a specific item.

>>the verbs {Qotlh} "disable", {lagh} "take apart, disassemble" and {pej}
>>"demolish". Another useful verb is {chu'Ha'} "deactivate, disengage" 
>>for "disarm".

>That could be part of the job, but falls short of the complete mission.
>That's why disposal works so well. The idea is to eliminate the
>explosive hazard. That could be accomplished by plowing the whole thing
>up or by removing the explosives then rendering the explosives un-
>Thank you to everybody who helped on this, I have some great ideas now.
>But further discussion is welcome.

Even more vocabulary for you to play with...

{Qob} "danger" (n.) Also "hazard"??
{Qob} "be dangerous" (v.)  Also "be hazardous"?

  DopDaq qul yIchenmoH QobDI' ghu' 
  Set fire on the side when there is danger. PK

[BTW... if that's not a motto for an EOD unit, I don't know what is! <g>]

It's not canon, but *{QobHa'} could mean "be safe" and *{QobHa'moH} "make/render (something) safe".

{Qom} "be hazardous, be perilous, be treacherous" (slang) (v.)

KGT 162-63:  The word {Qom} literally means "experience a tremor" or, using an old Terran phrase, "experience an earthquake". The word is used in its slang sense of "perilous, treacherous" when applied to a mission or voyage. For example, {Qom Qu'} (literally, "The mission experiences a tremor") means "The mission is perilous". Likewise, {Qom He} (literally, "The route experiences a tremor") generally means "The route is treacherous", implying that the journey is treacherous. The word can also be applied to the state of a structure or a vessel following a disastrous encounter, though in this case the verb usually takes the perfective suffix {-pu'}, indicating that the action has been completed. Thus, {Qompu' Duj} (literally, "The ship has experienced a tremor") may be used to mean "The ship is hazardous, has been left in a hazardous condition". The fact that in the Krotmag dialect (...) the word {Qob} ("be dangerous") would be pronounced {Qom} is probably not unrelated to the origin of the idiomatic usage of {Qom}, though the basic meaning of {Qom} itself certainly carries with it the notion of potential danger. Note that despite its slang meaning of "be hazardous, treacherous", the way the verb is used grammatically is based on its standard, literal sense. That is, while it is acceptable to say {He Qob} ("dangerous route"), using {Qob} ("be dangerous") adjectivally, it is ungrammatical to say *{He Qom} for "perilous route". The verb {Qom} still means "experience a tremor" and must be used in a grammatical structure appropriate to that meaning." (KGT 162-63) 

{QaD} "be safe, be protected" (slang)

KGT 161:  Literally meaning "be dry", the word {QaD} may be applied to just about anything: a person, object, place, and so forth. For example, {QaD puq} ("The child is dry") means that the child is safe; {vengHom QaD} ("dry village") means that the village is protected. This slang meaning may have developed in part because of the Klingon association of water with weakness (as opposed to the strength of blood or ale, for that matter) and in part because of the phonetic similarity of {QaD} to {Qan} ("protect").

Canon Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level