[Tlhingan-hol] ghargh'a' HoD'a' je -- cha'DIch

[Gaerfindel]

On 6/21/2014 4:29 AM, Felix Malmenbeck wrote:
>> loD mach tu'lu'.  loDHom tu'lu'.
> Not a grammatical mistake, but this gives me the feelings that you're talking about two separate people: A small man and a boy.
>
> If there were a known Klingon word for "dwarf", I might recommend something like
> loD mach tu'lu'. *dwarf* ghaH.
> "There was a small man. He was a dwarf."
>> rut bID loD pong.
> I'm afraid I can't check from here, but I believe one ordinarily places «bID» after the thing that's in half; for example, I know "skirt" has been translated as «paH bID» ("half a dress/robe"), at least.
>
> Of course, one could argue that «loD bID», "man's half", would be more appropriate for a man who's been cut in half, whereas «bID loD» ("half:ish man") is more appropriate for a man who exhibits some sort of ... "halfiness".
Well here's where I ran into some trouble.  Not having a copy of the BoP 
myself, I guessed that BID, like any other "number element", would come 
before the noun it describes.  But I can see your point; {BID loD} does 
rather connote "half a man}, while {loD BID}  comes across closer to the 
appellation "half-man."
>
> Also, you'll want a -lu' on that «pong», unless you've specified elsewhere who it is that calls him "half-man" (in which case you'll probably want a lu- prefix instead, to indicate that he's called this by more than one person).
maj.
>> chIch ta' HIvjeDaq tarHey'e' nopupu' loDHom}
> As you say, this is kind of a difficult sentence to translate.
> It seems you're trying to use a sentence as an object here, with the man as the subject of the second sentence.
> I'd advise you to restructure this, for example by putting the man in the first sentence, rather than the second.
>
> To illustrate:
> Let's say we have the sentence "This guard is known to kill prisoners."
> This can be rephrased as "It is known that this guard kills prisoners."
> which can be translated as
> «qama'pu' HoH 'avwI'vam net Sov.»
The problem here is {net Sov} *cannot* apply as it is *not* truly know 
if Tirion poisoned King Jeoffrey.

But let's break this down, as you say:

Sentence 1:
{*Jeoffrey* ta' HIvje'Daq tar lIchlu'ta'}
lit.  "Into King Jeoffrey's cup someone purposefully poured poison.""

Sentence 2:
{ *dwarf*'e' lupum Hoch}
"All accuse the dwarf."

Hmmm...Klingon seem to work better in short, choppy sentences. Maybe 
that ought to be my "guiding star" from now on.

~quljIb