On 6/4/2018 7:51 PM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
vaj bIQDaq jul mave'taH,
I think what you're going for is *vaj bIQDaq julDaq mave'*/So we travel on a mission in the water toward the sun./ The word *jul* needs some kind of reason for being there.
So this is probably a very Indo-European-centric view, but I always read places with a locative marker as something like a “locative case” and places without one as an “accusative case”.
You're right to read places, or any noun or noun phrase, with a locative marker as locative case. That's exactly what it is. However, Klingon does not have an accusative (or nominative) case; direct objects and subjects are determined purely by position. Oh, I think I know what I did wrong. I used a no object verb prefix. Does “vaj bIQ'a'Daq jul wIve' maH” make better sense here? (Or perhaps wIjaH instead of wIve' maH, since we have attested examples of jaH taking a direct object, at least according to boQwI'’s examples for the jaH entry.) That's right: we don't know if *ve'* can be used transitively. I rather believe that it doesn't. Use *wIjaH.*
I know that’s probably not accurate, but that’s how I usually try to figure whether or not I want a -Daq. In this sentence I’m trying to communicate that jul is the destination, and bIQ is where mave' is taking place, but if they both have -Daq, what prevents one from reading it as “on the sun in the water”? (i.e., the water contains a sun, and we are traveling with a purpose on that sun.)
Would -vaD be a wrong suffix to distinguish the roles of bIQ and jul in this sentence? e.g.: bIQDaq julvaD mave'.
It would be wrong. *julvaD* means you're traveling for the sun's benefit, or you're giving something to the sun. The song lyric literally means traveling /toward/ the sun. That's *-Daq.* As for /on the sun in the water,/ the only thing you can do about that is reword. Klingon *-Daq* is a very general locative, and usually doesn't let you distinguish between being in, on, at, or by something.
naDev chaHtaH jupma' je,
Poetry again. In prose this would be better as *'ej tIjpu' juppu'ma'*/And our friends have boarded./ This definitely needs to be an *'ej,* not a *je.*
The je is meant to communicate that we are here, and our friends are here too. Would it work better if I reverse the clauses in the last line of the chorus?
But you didn't SAY we are here, so there's nothing to /too/ about. You said we go, and you said we inhabit. The way I see it, this is purely an *'ej* situation. We go, we inhabit, and our friends are here.
Sumqu' je latlhpu' tu'lu'.
You've got two main verbs in this sentence; it doesn't work. The *je* is a bit wrong too, since you're not repeating noun or verbs from one sentence to another. I'd just drop any /and/ or /also;/ the English doesn't use one. Maybe in prose it would be *jIlmaj chaH latlh law''e'.*
Oh right, I keep treating tu'lu' as a fixed phrase without regard to the actual verb tu' it’s built around.
*tu'lu'* is fixed in that its prefix is often ignored and it has a special meaning of /there is, there are,/ but otherwise it's just a normal verb. When it's the main verb, you can't have another main verb.
I like your suggestion (especially because rhyming “law''e'” with “je” instead of “tu'lu'” with “muchchoHlu'pu'” better matches the rhyme scheme of the Terran adaptation), but I would like another syllable or three; jIlma' chaH latlhpu' law''e'? (I’m not familiar with what rule allows 'e' on law' here; could you explain it please?)
When you link two nouns in a "to be" sentence, the final noun is the topic and must have *-'e'* on it. When you modify a noun with a verb of quality acting as an adjective, any type 5 suffixes the noun might have get put on the verb instead. *latlh'e'*/another (as topic)/ becomes *latlh law''e'*/many others (as topic)./ (Also, I just realized it should be *jIlma',* not *jIlmaj.* Sorry, neighbor.) // Combining these two rules: *jIlma' chaH latlh'e' */Others are our neighbors./ *jIlma' chaH latlh law''e' */Many others are our neighbors./
Okay, I really only added the qu' for meter here, not realizing that SuDqu' is a particular shade of SuD. I was just trying to say that the sky is very SuD, and the sea is SuD as well.
In English the sky being blue and the sea being green is a contrast, but I think it more interesting for the Klingon version to point out the similarity of them being the same color, especially since it’s also the color of our submarine.
I can fill that syllable with 'oH to avoid making SuDqu' and SuD, e.g. either:
SuD 'oH chal, 'ej SuD bIQ je, bIQ qoD DujmajDaq maHegh…
or:
SuD 'oH chal, 'ej SuD bIQ'a', bIQ qoD Dujmaj SuD wIDabba'!
You can't say *SuD 'oH chal;* you have to say *SuD chal.* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name