[Tlhingan-hol] Story: ghuv = The Recruit - 51

[Robyn Stewart]

On 2013-10-23, at 7:53, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:

> ngongmeH wa' DujDaq nuHmey nISbe'bogh So'wI' jomlu'pu'
> [A cloaking device which didn't disrupt weaponry was installed in one experimental ship. (untranslated on card)] S33

Interesting that it's not ngonglu'meH. I initially read it as ngongmeH wa' ...

I also like that there's no need to add -'e' because the verb only permits one noun to be the head. I like -'e' to be a disambiguator when necessary, but not an automatic addition when not. 

> loS... qIb HeHDaq, 'u' SepmeyDaq Sovbe'lu'bogh lenglu'meH He ghoSlu'bogh retlhDaq 'oHtaH
> It waits... on the edge of the galaxy, beside a passage to unknown regions of the universe. S99

Ugh. I read that as "Four ... It is at [etcetera]." The ellipsis wasn't enough to reset the word order. If anyone else had written that I would have them throw out the 'oHtaH and move the loS to its place. Starting the sentence with the concept of waiting is just not that important. And if they convinced me it was, then put a full stop after loS and repeat it as the verb of the second sentence. 

> jIHtaHbogh naDev vISovbe'

I've always loved this one. It feels so idiomatic. 

> Dajatlhbogh vIyajlaHbe'
> I find no match for what you just said. KCD

noy nach Hutlhbogh lIghwI'vetlh. 

> tajwIj 'oHbe' chorlIj jeqbogh Dochvetlh'e'
> That is not my dagger protruding from your midsection. 

Interesting how the English translation misses the implication in the Klingon that the speaker may be denying identification not ownership of the weapon. tajwIj'e' 'oHbe'. baghneQwIj 'oH. 

> nuH'e' qengbogh mangghomvam luDel 'e' ra' molor, lujang maS'e' loQ So'be'bogh QIb lurur
> Molor asks them what weapons this army carries, they reply, shaped as the crescent moon. PB

I think nuH is better translated "arsenal" or something there, because it's being used in the singular: luDel. And then I started to read it as "it was the moons that answered him..." :-)

> vaSvamDaq tuq veng je quvvaD Heghqangbogh SuvwI’ tu’be’lu’’a’
> Is there nobody in this hall prepared to die for the honor of your tribe and city? PB
> 
>  
>  
>  
> From: Robyn Stewart [mailto:robyn at flyingstart.ca] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 9:37 AM
> 
> The one that trips me up is when complex verbs are reflexive. QeS does it all the time: rIQ'eghmoHlaHbe'mo' or the like. As non native speakers it's hard to know what's just our understanding and what's poor Klingon. It's possible, in universe, that the proverb itself would be hard to parse were it not so familiar. I agree that negation is sometimes harder to parse.
>  
> In this case:
>   luSopbe'meH yIHmey boghbejpu' torgh
>  
> is worse, I think. 
> 
> On 2013-10-23, at 0:31, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Qov:
> > luSopmeH yIH boghbe'bejpu' torgh. = "Torg was definitely not born for
> > tribbles to eat him."
> 
> I have trouble parsing {-meH} with negation.
> 
> I initially read that as:
> "Torg was (definitely not born) for tribbles to eat him."
> 
> It wasn't until I read the translation that I understood you meant:
> "Torg was definitely not (born for tribbles to eat him)."
> 
> I have the same trouble with {Hoch DaSopbe'chugh bath bIHeghbe'} so I apparently have trouble understanding {-be'} when it negates complex sentences.
> 
> -- 
> De'vID
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20131023/8784cdf8/attachment-0001.html>