[tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: nugh

[Steven Boozer]

qunnoq :
>> nughraj Dun lurDechmeyraj Dun je DIvuvta' 'e' lutul HaDwI'pu' 'ej
>>  vItul jIH. lIbelmoH paqvam 'e' vItul.
>> The editors and I hope to have respected your rich culture and
>>  tradition, and we hope that you will be pleased with the results.
>>  (Vincent Van Gerven Oei's speech at qepHom wa'maHDIch [2011])
> 
> Is this canon ? Who is Vincent Van Gerven Oei ?
 
Here's Felix's email from April 2012:

-------------------------------------------------------
From: Felix Malmenbeck [felixm at kth.se]
Date: 4/21/2012

This is the speech which Vincent Van Gerven Oei (from the publisher of paq'balth) read at qepHom wa'maHDIch [2011].  For reference, here is the most relevant portion of his subsequent English speech:

tlhInganpu' quv -
Dear Klingons,

tlhIHvaD paq chu' wImuch 'e' bochaw'mo' chequvmoH 'ej chebelmoH.
lut'a'raj Dun laDlaHmeH tera'ngan, tera'Daq tlhIngan lut'a' paq wa'DIch wIchenmoHta', lut'a' 'oH paq'batlh'e'.
It is a great honor and pleasure that you have allowed us to present you
with the first Terran edition of your glorious epic, the paq'batlh.  

nughraj Dun lurDechmeyraj Dun je DIvuvta' 'e' lutul HaDwI'pu' 'ej vItul jIH. lIbelmoH paqvam 'e' vItul. 
The editors and I hope to have respected your rich culture and tradition,
 and we hope that you will be pleased with the results.

DaH DIvI' Hol vIjatlhchoH. 'oy' HughwIj.
[untranslated]

I've written it down as best I could make it out from the text visible in this video, and what he can be heard saying: http://player.vimeo.com/video/32050802?autoplay=1 

It's unclear who wrote it, but Marc strikes me as a likely candidate, since they did the presentation together. 
-------------------------------------------------------
 
> Other than that, the first sentence goes :
> 
> {nughraj Dun lurDechmeyraj Dun je DIvuvta' 'e' lutul[] 
>  HaDwI'pu' 'ej vItul jIH}
> 
> But shouldn't there be an {'e'} before the {vItul jIH}? 
> I mean, shouldn't we have the following sentence instead?

I think that the second {'e'} before {vItul jIH} has been elided because 1) the two clauses are so short closely related (they have the same verb, if different subjects); and 2) a second {'e'} might make the listener think the sentence-as-object (SAO) referred to was {lutul HaDwI'pu'} and not {DIvuvta'}.
 
  ... DIvuvta' 'e' lutul HaDwI'pu' ('ej vItul jIH)
  The editors hope (and I hope) that we-have-respected-them

Note that the prefix of {vuv} is {DI-} "WE [do something to] them": i.e. {HaDwI'pu' jIH je} "the editors and I".  Apparently the way to do this is to repeat the verb with each subject instead of:

 * ... DIvuvta' 'e' wItul HaDwI'pu' jIH je
  The editors and I we-hope that we-have-respected-them

which is how I would have translated it.  It seems that my instincts would have been wrong.
 

--
Voragh
tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a'
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons