[tlhIngan Hol] How would you express "root of a tree" ?

[nIqolay Q]

On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 5:13 PM mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> If I say {muSujpu' ghargh mIllogh}, what am I saying ?
>
> The picture of a serpent disturbed me, or the picture of a worm disturbed
> me ?
>
> Since {ghargh} can mean both, how could someone say that I don't need to
> specify further ?
>

Probably something like "The picture of a long thin wriggly animal with no
legs disturbed me." This would include pictures of serpents, worms, and
caterpillars. (*'ughDuq ghargh* was given as a translation for
"caterpillar".) It would probably also include a number of other things
with a similar body shape, like caecilians, eels, leeches, nematodes, gagh,
and Shai-Hulud (*juStaHvIS qo' Say'qu'moHjaj*).


> There is a line in matthew, where jesus says something like (I don't have
> the original text at hand now):
>
> "who of you, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a serpent ?"
>
> Suppose I wrote:
>
> {‘ej ghotI’ HevmeH wa’ nuv puqloD, tlhobchugh puqvam, puqvamvaD ghargh nob
> vay’ ?}
>
> Can't the reader here assume that the {ghargh} could mean "worm" instead ?
>
> Now, don't tell me "it wouldn't make for a big difference in meaning", or
> "to a klingon it would be the same".
>
> Because it would make a *major* difference in meaning, and klingons as
> well as their understanding of things, can burn in hell for all I care.
>

What kind of fish is Jesus talking about? What kind of snake? The word
"snake" or "serpent" can apply to harmless snakes and to very dangerous
ones. Some snakes can be eaten, some can't. The precise snake in question
could have an important effect on the meaning of the proverb, but the
translations don't specify. In context, it's clear that the specific kind
of snake isn't what's important. What's important is the idea of 1) not
giving someone what they asked for and 2) giving them something probably
useless and possibly even dangerous instead. Whether you give your son the
kind of *ghargh* that has scales and big fangs, or the kind of *ghargh*
that's tiny, has no eyes, and eats dirt, either way, you're not giving him
a *ghotI'*.

Having said all that, if you still want to make sure that the reader knows
that giving your son a snake instead of a fish is a *petaQ tonSaw'*, *ghargh
Qob* "dangerous legless-wiggly-thing" might work.

(Actually, given Klingon cuisine, the whole parable might need to be
rewritten. A lunch that can fight back would probably be considered quite
invigorating.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190713/2cb43288/attachment.htm>