<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/4/2018 10:26 AM, Daniel Dadap
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">The phrase “vengDaq jIboghpu'bogh” idly popped into my mind this morning and naturally it morphed into this. Please let me know about any unforgivable grammatical or lexical errors and I will do my best to correct them while preserving the flow of the song:</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>This is the old <i>ship in which I fled</i> problem. The head
noun of a relative clause MUST be either the subject or object of
the clause.</p>
<p>Without regard to meter or rhyme, <i>in the town where I was
born</i> would probably best be expressed as <b>boghpu'ghach
vengwIj</b><i> in my birth-town.</i><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">vengHomDaq jIboghpu'bogh,
bIQ'a' lengbogh loD tu'lu'.
maHvaD yInDaj lut nuja',
Daq bIQ Dujmey Hoch qaSpu'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I don't understand this line.</p>
<p>I'd also note that a <b>bIQ Duj</b> is already used for a
surface ship. I'm not sure how Klingons would refer to a
submarine.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">vaj bIQDaq jul mave'taH,</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I think what you're going for is <b>vaj bIQDaq julDaq mave'</b><i>
So we travel on a mission in the water toward the sun.</i> The
word <b>jul</b> needs some kind of reason for being there. I
don't think you really want <b>-taH;</b> the line <i>So we
sailed up to the sun / Till we found a sea of green</i> isn't
about the continuousness of the journey, going on before the time
of this action and going on after the time of this action. It's
just a statement of what the action was.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">bIQ'a' SuD wISamDI' mamev.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I know you're concerned for meter and assonance, but this really
needs to be <b>mamevpu',</b> and probably <b>wISampu'DI'.</b>
You're talking about an action that is completed in the time in
which the action happens.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">'ej yu'egh bIngDaq maHtaH,
bIQ qoD DujmajDaq maHegh…</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Again, I recognize your poetic constraints, but in prose, and
assuming we can use <b>bIQ qoD Duj</b> as <i>submarine,</i> this
would be simple as <b>'ej yu'egh bIngDaq bIQ qoD Duj SuD wIDab</b><i>
And we inhabit our <b>SuD</b> submarine beneath the waves.</i><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Let's just drop the <b>Hoch, </b>okay? English has a special
phrase <i>we all</i> which syntactically means exactly the same
thing as <i>we,</i> but it includes a connotation of completeness,
like there's no one left who isn't counted. Klingon doesn't have
this. There's no evidence that Klingon say <b>Hoch maH</b> or <b>maH
Hoch</b> or anything else to mean this, and grammatical analysis
of this phrase doesn't lead to English <i>we all.</i>
Grammatically, I'd be more inclined to use <b>Hochmaj</b><i> our
allness</i> as a third-person noun before those. But that sounds
silly too, even if it has the virtue of making grammatical sense. Or
use a <b>-chu'</b> to indicate completeness.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.
bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,
DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
An interesting strategy to spread out the concepts where the English
original just repeats phrases.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">naDev chaHtaH jupma' je,</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Poetry again. In prose this would be better as <b>'ej tIjpu' juppu'ma'</b><i>
And our friends have boarded.</i> This definitely needs to be an
<b>'ej,</b> not a <b>je.</b><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">Sumqu' je latlhpu' tu'lu'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>You've got two main verbs in this sentence; it doesn't work. The
<b>je</b> is a bit wrong too, since you're not repeating noun or
verbs from one sentence to another. I'd just drop any <i>and</i>
or <i>also;</i> the English doesn't use one. Maybe in prose it
would be <b>jIlmaj chaH latlh law''e'.</b><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">'ej vogh QoQ muchchoHlu'pu'…</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>The <b>vogh</b> is there for a syllable?<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">[ QoQ muchlu'taH ]
bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,
DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.
bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,
DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.
[ tujqu'choH QuQ. ]
[ nughoS jagh. ]
[ chay' jura? ]
[ batlh maHegh! ]
[ cha yIghuS! ]
[ So'wI' yIchu'Ha'! ]</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
chomonmoHpu'.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">'ej ngeDtaHvIS yInmeymaj,
Hoch 'utbogh Dochmey wIghaj.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><b>DIghaj</b><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">SuDqu' chal, 'ej SuD bIQ je,</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><b>SuDqu'</b> is green. I wouldn't use <b>je</b> here, since
you're saying that one thing is <b>SuD</b> and the other is <b>SuDqu';</b>
that's not an <i>also<b>.</b></i><i><b> </b></i>The song is
making a contrast between two things by saying how they have
different colors. In ordinary Klingon language, sky and sea have
the same color, though they are different shades of that color. If
you want to maintain the contrast, you have to talk about shades,
in which case you definitely can't use <b>je.</b></p>
<p>I might change it up a bit and use <b>SuD chal 'ach SuDqu' bIQ</b><i>
The sky is <b>SuD</b> but the sea is very <b>SuD.</b></i><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:51D0E0CB-BE73-4101-8F3C-8686C0E32308@dadap.net">
<pre wrap="">bIQ qoD DujmajDaq maHegh…
bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,
DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.
bIQ qoD Duj SuD Hoch maH wIDabbejtaH,
DujmajDaq maHtaH, bIQDaq majaHtaH.
(If the lyrics don’t make it obvious, sing this to the tune of “Yellow Submarine” by the Beatles. The dialog taken from the beginning of “Conversational Klingon” is meant to take the place of the muffled speech heard before the final verse; if anybody ever ends up recording this, feel free to substitute other dialog, or cut out some lines to make it fit better, depending on the amount of time in the intervening measures between the chorus and verse.)
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>