[Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' cha'vatlh wa'maH Soch: romuluSngan SuvchoHmeH ngeD

[Robyn Stewart]

At 14:52 '?????' 7/6/2012, you wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Qov <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
> > Hota'ro' ghoS vajar 'ej DaQDaj luH. noDmeH DIng Hota'ro' 'ach vajar Hotpa'
> > mev'egh.
>
>mev'eghbe'chugh, Hot'a' Hota'ro' ro'?

ghaytan pummoH. chaq HoH. Qob ghopDu'Daj.

> > Hagh vajar. jatlh, "reH bIDugh. QaplI''a' nablIj?"
> >
> > "HIja'," jatlh Hota'ro'. "yIlegh. QujvetlhvaD boqchuq ngaH Sogh, 
> ya Sogh je.
>
>jonpIn ghaH ngaH'e' qar'a'? 'ay'mey ngo'Daq patlhDaj vInej. vItu'be'
>'ach Sogh moch ghaH 'e' vItu'.
>
>I've been compensating for my confusion about ranks by looking up the
>context in which characters were introduced. I didn't notice ngaH
>being identified by rank before, but it surprises me to see that she's
>a {Sogh}, as at least two of her subordinates were {Sogh} as well.
>
>{ya Sogh} sounds very odd to me. "Lieutenant Tactical Officer"? Was
>{ya} supposed to be a name?

Ahh, okay problem here. One thing at a time:

1. ngaH's rank: Not being able to find ngaH's rank easily by 
rereading is understandable. vajar had the same problem. She wasn't 
introduced by rank, only by position, and she wasn't wearing a 
uniform or rank insignia. Later the fat yeoman addressed her by rank, 
and vajar thought the yeoman was talking to him, because ngaH's rank 
is "HoD." vajar, in fact, is ranked la', a rank below HoD, but 
carries the title HoD because he commands a vessel. ngaH doesn't 
command a vessel, but is in charge of a staff larger than vajar's 
crew at full complement, reports to a Sa', and knows how to play the 
woQ Quj better than vajar ever will. She's a senior command officer 
For a comparison, on the Enterprise-A at the time of The Search for 
Spock, both Spock and Scotty held the rank of captain. I haven't 
specified ngaH's age, but she's not much younger than vajar and could 
well be older.

As well as learning about the condition of vajar's ship, I hoped in 
the scenes in engineering for the reader to recognize that despite 
her size, ngaH was a powerful member of the crew and engineering a 
sizable, hardworking department with some autonomy and some ability 
to evade the ever-present veS security.

2. ngaH Sogh and ya Sogh were both intended as possessives, "ngaH's 
lieutenant" and "the tactical officer's lieutenant."  As I wrote and 
proofread I didn't notice how they could be misinterpreted, but they 
obviously were misinterpreted by a competent speaker of Klingon, so I 
need to fix them.

Let's see:  jonpIn Sogh won't work if ya Sogh didn't, so {ngaH 
toy'bogh Sogh'e'}, {to' 'ay' Sogh} je? jonwI' 'ay' Sogh/ya 'ay' 
Sogh  vay' yIchup.

> > DaH yeqmeH 'ebmey jonlI'mo', cha' rep pIq chaq voqchuqqang."
>
>cha' rep pIq qaS nuq? latlh nablI''a' Hota'ro'?

chaq nablI'. chaq lopno' poH chov neH. DaSovlaHbe'. 'ach DaH 
taQqu'be'choHpu' ghaH, qar'a'?

> > vumtaHmo' Dach ngaH.
>
>jImISchu'. yeqtaH ngaH ya je 'e' vIQub. Qaghba' vay'.

Dach ya, ngaH je. not yeqlaw' yavetlh ja' vajar DorwI'.

> > SaH Qoreq[258]. Suchta' qaH'eng 'ach yaHDajDaq
> > cheghnISpu'. reH vum'a' be'vetlh?
>
>chaq ja'chuq ghaH, vumnIStaHbogh latlh je.

vumtaH 'e 'tIvlaw'. chaq vumqu'mo' wo' toy'bej 'e' ghetlaH.

> > SaH Qugh Qel, 'ach tugh mej.
>
>rep vIghochchugh, ghaytan Qa'bar DujHomDaq Qollu'.

tugh qechvetlh DachovlaH. bIQDaq 'eSSIm pumba'pu' 'ach Qa'bar DujDaj 
pawpu''a' Mossam?

> > ratlh wa'
> > latlh Qel, rachwI' puS je. vajar lumer SaHbogh nuvpu' mI'.
>
>**
>naDev lugh'a' <_lu_mer>? mer mI' 'ar?

jISovbe'. jaS vang Hol Sar. tlhIngan HolvaD chovnatlh wIghaj'a'

> > vaghmaH nuv
> > lutu'lu'. may'mey law' SIQpu' yaSpu'vam 'ej yaymey Dun chavtaH. lutmey
> > 'IjtaHvIS vajar, yabDajDaq chentaH nger. quvHa'taHmo' Duj, quvHey luchavmeH
> > may'Daq Suvqu'. 'ach quvna' luneHba'. yaSpu' mInDu' bejtaHvIS vajar
> > lotlhruplaw'ghach ghovlaw',
>
>yaS wa'DIch Dun wIvta'.

wIvmey law' ghajbe'pu'. jaS Qubmo' Hota'ro', tlhoS lajHa' vajar, 'ach 
QapmeH nabDaj numnIS. chaq DaH ghojlI': pImDI' yaSpu', wa' Dol nIvDaq 
tay'DI' Qap.

> > 'ach chay' vang.
>
>qech vIyajbej, 'ej mu'tlhegh vIlaj, 'ach chenmeH pab nIt
>vISamlaHbe'law'. jIQubqu'taHchugh, chaq jIponHa''egh 'ej mu'tlhegh
>vIlajHa'.

SenglIj vIghovbe'.

rIQqu' 'uS: chay' yIt?
Hujbej Sojvam nov: chay' maSop?
yaSpu' pIlmoHmeH vajar, chay' vang?

> > jatlhbe' vay', <mInDu'lIjmo'
> > qImyal Sa' DaHoH DaneH 'e' vISov. Ha'! meH wIjevjaj!> romuluSnganpu'
> > jeynISlu'DI' ngeD ghu'.
>
>**
>_lu_jeynISlu'DI'
>
> > pa' 'el ne'. nom ghutar chol 'e' bej vajar. ghutarvaD jatlhtaHvIS vajarDaq
> > SIq 'ej bej.
>
>**
>'ut'a' <-Daq>? yapbe''a' <vajar SIq 'ej bej>?

rut mumISmoH SIq chutmey. vIHotchugh 'oHDaq jISIq'a' 'ach vIcha'chugh 
neH 'oH vISIq'a'?

> > mejDI' ne' SIbI' vajar chol ghutar. tlhupchoH. jatlh, "vajar
> > HoD, nIqopmeH ghoSlI' qImyal 'avwI'pu'."
> >
> > jatlh vajar, "qatlh? chaw' Hutlhmo' lopno'wIj jay'?"
>
>I'm trying to hear the question mark, but the terminal {jay'} doesn't
>seem to be cooperating. I really want there to be a {'a'} somewhere.

Clearly it's a sentence fragment, and I think I've stretched 
credibility with the extent to which these characters do speak in 
complete sentences. I'm perfectly happy with an elided main verb.

>We've heard {'entepray' 'a'?} from Klaa, and I don't think it would be
>completely out of the question (!) to do something similar here. But
>that's definitely more of a stretch than leaving out an implied
>{muqop'a'}, especially since {muqop} is implied a moment earlier, so I
>should just shut up.

bIjatlh 'e' yItaH.

> > jatlh ghutar, "ghobe'. qama' Sevmeyvo' De' DanIHta' net jatlh.
>
>Sevmey qelchoH 'Iv? toH, chaq Qa'bar DujDaq QaptaH DaqwI' cha'DIch.
>chaq qeng Qugh Qel.

wej poH Dangu'chu'be'ta' 'e' vIHar.  taghDI' 'ay''a' wa'maH, gharben 
cha' mejpu' vajar. taghDI' 'ay''a'vam veSDaq pawlI' vajar. qaSqa'lI' poH nIb.

> > Saghqu' ghu'.
> > DuHevbeHchoH joy'wI' pa' 'e' ra'. DaH pa' ghoSlI' Sa'."
> >
> > "Dap!" jatlh vajar. betleH pep 'ej raSDaq QamchoH. HoSba'mo' raS
> > ghorbe'.[253]
>
>vaj beplaHbe' HungpIn. 'ach jenmo' vajar DoS nap mojpu'.

SIbI' Sengvetlh Daghovpu' jIHagh.

> > jatlh vajar, "vIjonlu'pa' jIHeghjaj." lunaD nuv law' 'ej
> > tlhutlh. HIq naD neH vajar 'e' luHar 'ach tlhIngan qa'chaj pIlmoH vajar
> > mu'mey.
> >
> > "tlhIngan maH!" jach vay' 'ej mu'mey Sey tlhoQDaq DuDchuq naDmey law'.
>
>(What's Klingon for "rhubarb"?)

I bet it has a H and a rgh in it.

> > "bIng ghoS!" jatlh ghutar. "nISwI' tIH." yaj vajar. raSDaq ghaHtaHchugh
> > QeqlaHchu' 'avwI'pu'.
>
>toy'chu' HoD beq. HungpIn pov rur ghutar.

pervetlh wIvta'DI' ghutar, tlhochbe' vajar, 'ach Dotlhvetlh bajtaH 
ghutar lagh. ghaytan yIntaHbogh qo'larngan tu'be'pu'mo' DIv tIqDaj. 
tob'eghnISqa'.

> > bong yaSpu'chajDaq bach luneHbe'mo' 'avwI'pu' vajarvaD
> > rav qaq law' raS qaq puS. ghutarmo' Hagh 'op 'ach Sagh ghu' 'e' tlhoj 'op.
>
>wa' Doch 'oH'a' 'opvam'e'? In English, "some are" if you're talking
>about a count of things, but "some is" if you're talking about a part
>of a thing. The difference would probably be mirrored by {'op Doch}
>and {Doch 'op} in Klingon. Is {'op} alone singular or plural when it
>means "some (of them)"? If it's plural, {'e' _lu_tlhoj 'op}.

Again, dunno. I'll put a lu- on that one for you.

> > HIvje'mey roQ 'ej nuHmey lel. pa'Daq lenglI' Sov yu'egh. tach lu'elDI' cha'
> > 'avwI'pu', may'morgh lurur Suvrupbogh lopwI'pu'.
>
><quvHey luchavmeH may'Daq Suvqu'> jatlhlu'pu'. DaH may'Daq quvna'vaD 
>Suvqu'rup.

dun dun DUN!

wej rav charchoHmoH 'Iw. 'ach tugh.

- Qov