[Tlhingan-hol] A moment of clarity

[qunnoQ HoD]

> So what is it about "molon lave" that carries the sense of defiance? Is
it the choice of words, the specific grammar, the cultural association with
that particular event, or what?

I just don't know ! I can't put it in words. It really makes me sad,that I
cannot convey in english/klingon its original *feeling*. Its like trying to
describe to someone the taste of a food,he has never tasted. You might be
able to get close ; maybe very-very close. But in the end there is no way
he could understand the true *taste*,except if he eventually tasted it
himself.

> It carries the meaning, but is too wordy. The Spartans, via their home
province of Laconia, were responsible for the adjective "laconic", and
Leonidas's two-word reply of "molôn labe" - literally, "having come, take"
- is often cited
> as being a classic example of laconic (or Laconic, in fact) speech. Its
brevity is a large part of what gives it its punch.

EXACTLY !

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh at hotmail.com> wrote:

> ghItlhpu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv, jatlh:
> > Persian messenger: Separtanpu’! rejeyta’! nuHmeylIj tIchaghchugh
>
> {tIchaghchugh}? Surely it should be either {bochaghchugh} or {tIchagh}.
>
> jang qunnoQ HoD, jatlh:
> > why {Separtanpu'} and not {Spartanpu'} ?
>
> As ghunchu'wI' points out, lojmIt tI'wI' nuv's choice here has to do with
> the fact that Klingon syllables cannot start with more than one consonant.
> So in order for a Klingon to pronounce it comfortably, there has to be a
> vowel inserted between them. From the EuroTalk CD, for instance, we know
> that "strawberry" becomes {Sutra'ber naH}, "France" becomes {vIraS},
> "grape" becomes {ghIrep naH}.
>
> ghItlhqa'pu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv, jatlh:
> > vaj SuyIntaH ‘e’ wIchaw’qang.
> > Leonidas: nuHmaj boSuqlaH’a’? ghotob jay’!
>
> It carries the meaning, but is too wordy. The Spartans, via their home
> province of Laconia, were responsible for the adjective "laconic", and
> Leonidas's two-word reply of "molôn labe" - literally, "having come, take"
> - is often cited as being a classic example of laconic (or Laconic, in
> fact) speech. Its brevity is a large part of what gives it its punch.
>
> I think SuStel has it on the nose with {Ha', tItlhap}.
>
> QeS 'utlh
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151112/f284cb2e/attachment.html>