[Tlhingan-hol] romyo' julyet je: bI'reS

[Rohan Fenwick]

jIjatlhpu' jIH:
> romyo' julyet je: bI'reS
> nur rap lughajbogh cha' tuqmey tu'lu',

> vero'na' 'IHDaq qaS ghe'naQmaj Dun;

> muStaHghachDaj tIQvo' chenchoH Seng chu',

On reflection I think that {muSchuqtaHghach} "mutual hatred" might be better.

mujang De'vID, jatlh:
> I don't think you can say {X-vo' chenchoH Y} unless X is a physical place.
I take a slightly more liberal view on {-Daq} and {-vo'} as spatial locatives, following the canon proverb {wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap}. That proverb doesn't imply that everyone needs necessarily to be in the same *physical* location. In any case, I think of it as like a metaphorical new shoot of trouble emerging from the soil of the two houses' ancient hatred.
jIH:

> ghopDu' mIl HoQmoH quv ghajbogh 'Iw chun.

> HeghmoHbogh cha' gholpu'vam tuqmeyvaD

> yInnIS[1] bang chang'eng 'e' maq QI'tu' San.

> [1] The English here is "a pair of star-crossed lovers take their life",> in which "take their life" could carry meanings of both birth and suicide.> I couldn't work out a decent wordplay as written, but {yInnIS} "they need> to live" could alternately be read as {yIn nIS} "they disrupt lives".
De'vID:


> {nargh yInchaj} "their lives appear/escape"? Just a thought.
And an excellent one. Let me try again (also changing {-vaD} to {-vo'} in the preceding line to compensate):

HeghmoHbogh cha' gholpu'vam tuqmeyvo'

nargh bang chang'eng qa' 'e' maq QI'tu' San.vangHa'pu' chaH, tIvup! tuqchaj pabQo','ej Heghchajmo' cha' tuq yol ngo' luvan.


jIH:> taHqu'taHbogh parmaqqayvetlh chuD QeH,

De'vID:
> I had trouble understanding that {QeH} was a noun, rather than an adjective> modifying {chuD}.
The reading with {QeH} as an adjective makes less sense semantically: "the lovers' angry kin who indeed endure".

taH:
> Also, possibly {chuD} is too broad for "parents".
I was going for this for two reasons: 1) the feud between the Montagues and the Capulets in the story goes beyond just the parents to include most members of the two warring houses, so I thought the choice was appropriate; but 2) more importantly I couldn't find any easy recast for "parents" that didn't go to at least five syllables (vavchaj SoSchaj je), eating up a full half-line. Are you thinking of an alternative?

taH:
> It would also help to put in explicit plural markers.


yajchu'. For both {parmaqqay} and {chuD}, you think? So three alternatives:

taHqu'taHbogh parmaqqaypu' chuD QeH.taHqu'taHbogh parmaqqay chuDmey QeH. 
taHqu'bogh parmaqqaypu' chuDmey QeH.

jIH:> parmaqchaj'e' bejbogh Hegh je wImuch;

> yol Qaw' puq yIn lughanglu'pu'bogh neH,

De'vID:
> Good contrast between {ghang} and {van} used two lines above.
tlho'. :)


jIH:> DaH vaSmajDaq cha' rep lutvam wIruch.[2]

> [2] Though strictly we don't have canon for it, I like using {ruch} in this way.
De'vID:


> ?{Qu'lIj yIruch} looks to me like it's missing a verb. I would write this as> {Qu'lIj yIchav, yIruch!} ?{lutvam wIruch} looks to me like it's missing something> for the same reason. What are we doing with {lut}? {bej}? {ja'}? {much?}
I understand your point. Does this work any better for you?
naDev cha' rep lutvetlh wIcha' net ruch.

taH:
> I interpret {targhlIj yIngagh, yIruch} as {targhlIj yIngagh, [targhlIj Dangagh 'e']> yIruch}, where the part in [brackets] is implicit.
Your implication is that {ruch} is in fact capable of taking an object, if that's the case.
jIH:
> rIn bI'reS, 'ach vay' Qoybe'lu'pu'chugh,

> tuvchugh teSDu', yajmoHjaj muchmaj Dugh.

De'vID:
> The original is directed to the watcher, rather than an indefinite person,> and I think it's better if it's kept the same.
That's fair too. I have to confess my choice was done in the main to avoid having to choose between singular or plural for the direct address (singular as a reader, or plural as an audience). I'll go with plural for now. What do you think of:
rIn bI'reSvam, 'ach vay' boQoybe'chugh,
tuvchugh teSDu'raj, QIjjaj muchmaj Dugh.
QeS
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20140204/261b8725/attachment.html>