*lurtz*vaD QIjtaH *saruman* ; jatlhtaH:

I wouldn't normally expect a -taH here. It's not wrong per se, but the fact that his speech is ongoing isn't really relevant, is it? You want to talk about the fact of what he said, rather than the fact of its being ongoing.

Hasta lut DaDeltaH. paq vImaSchu'. Qatlhqu' Qeb joH mughmeH Qu'.

chay' orcs chenmoHlu'ta' ? bISov'a' ?

Considering the English original, "Do you know how the Orcs first came into being?" it seems to me that your aspect suffix here is correct. Saruman is asking how were the Orcs made, not how are Orcs made. It was an event. Completion makes sense here.

Sometimes one will pluralize a foreign word using the native language's plurals, and sometimes one use the foreign language's plurals. You've chosen the latter. I'll stick with that in this reply.

wa'DIch elves chaHpu'

This use of an ordinal at the beginning of a sentence is still new enough to us that I'm not completely comfortable with it, but I accept it as canonical. However, you have two choices here:

wa'DIch elves chaH
first they were elves

elves chaHpu'
they had been elves

You don't want both together; that means first they had been elves, which suggests that when you start ("first") they had already completed being elves, or that first they are elves for a moment.

 'ach quchta' HoSwI'pu' Hurgh ;

This one's a toughie. On the one hand, knowing my Silmarillion, I know that elves weren't taken by the servants of Melkor all at once; while they lived at Cuiviénen his shadows and spirits spied on them and waylaid them. quch (without the -ta') is really more appropriate.

On the other hand, if you're going strictly by what Saruman says in the movie, you'd really have no way of knowing that. You might well think he was referring to a single raid in which Melkor captured a bunch of elves. In that case, -ta' would be appropriate.

 joy'ta'

Same note. joy' is more appropriate for what the book describes, but for all you know in the movie when Saruman speaks it could have been joy'ta'.

 'ej
porghchaj luQaw'ta'..

Drop the lu-. Also, same note regarding aspect here.

You might want to use rIQmoH instead of Qaw' here. I don't feel either quite captures mutilate, though.

I'm out of time for now. See if you can apply this to the rest of your translation.

 tagha' ghot rIQchu' mojpu'.. lo'laHbe'pu' chaH..
ghot luQaw'lu'chu'ta'bogh chaH. 'ach DaH povchoH chaH !

SuvmeH *uruk-hai*wIj.. 'Iv Datoy' ?

('ej ngugh jang lurtz) : Saruman !!!

qunnoq
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name