is this grammatically correct ?
Suppose I write: {raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH; pa' Qotbogh je nuvpu'vaD jatlh..} for: "the emperor was reclining next to the table; he said for the people who were reclining there too.." Would the klingon sentence be grammatically correct ? I'm troubled by the {je} following a {-bogh} clause, and I don't know whether the {pa'} can refer *only* to the {Qotbogh}. I know I could express the desired meaning in other ways too, but I can't stop wondering whether the klingon sentence is actually correct. ~ bara'qa'
It sound wrong, although I can't tell why. It's a good question. I would wrap the "also" into a package of {latlh}: {latlh pa' Qotbogh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...} "He spoke to the other people standing there" -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/Word/VoDleH
It looks grammatically correct to me. However, I would also prefer to use {latlh}, although I think it would be clearer to attach it directly to nuvpu', rather than making a compound with a relative clause: {pa' Qotbogh latlh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...} You might also consider something like {lutlhejbogh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...}, but that might not make it clear that the others are also lying down. //loghaD ________________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> Sent: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 16:38 To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] is this grammatically correct ? It sound wrong, although I can't tell why. It's a good question. I would wrap the "also" into a package of {latlh}: {latlh pa' Qotbogh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...} "He spoke to the other people standing there" -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/Word/VoDleH _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 16:42, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se> wrote:
It looks grammatically correct to me. However, I would also prefer to use {latlh}, although I think it would be clearer to attach it directly to nuvpu', rather than making a compound with a relative clause:
{pa' Qotbogh latlh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...}
I also thought it was fine, but I'd say {latlhpu'} rather than {latlh nuvpu'}. Recall {DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap} (not {latlh nuvpu' vItap}) from Star Trek Constellations. -- De'vID
Two more examples of {latlhpu’}: Heghpu'bogh latlhpu' ghuHmoH bey. ghoS tlhIngan SuvwI' maq. This yell ... serves to warn the other dead that a Klingon warrior is coming. (S31) ghIq lutDaj jatlh qeylIS / latlhpu' law' pIlmoHpu' lutvam Then Kahless tells his tale, The tale that inspired many before them (PB) Voragh ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: De'vID On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 16:42, Felix Malmenbeck wrote: It looks grammatically correct to me. However, I would also prefer to use {latlh}, although I think it would be clearer to attach it directly to nuvpu', rather than making a compound with a relative clause: {pa' Qotbogh latlh nuvpu'vaD jatlh...} I also thought it was fine, but I'd say {latlhpu'} rather than {latlh nuvpu'}. Recall {DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap} (not {latlh nuvpu' vItap}) from Star Trek Constellations.
Am 06.11.2019 um 22:29 schrieb De'vID:
Recall {DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap} (not {latlh nuvpu' vItap}) from Star Trek Constellations.
What is "Constellations", and where does it have Klingon? I had heard of that, but my mind is a bit troubled apparently... Lieven. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Constellations
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 15:58, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 06.11.2019 um 22:29 schrieb De'vID:
Recall {DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap} (not {latlh nuvpu' vItap}) from Star Trek Constellations.
What is "Constellations", and where does it have Klingon
It was an anthology of Star Trek stories put together for the 40th anniversary: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constellations The story "The Leader" by Dave Galanter contains several sentences in Klingon, translated by Marc Okrand. The author credits Okrand in the authors' annotations supplement: "Klingonese translation provided by Marc Okrand from my English". -- De'vID
AFAIK there were six complete sentences. Here they are, followed by the author's annotations from http://www.allyngibson.net/st-const.html : Page 232 yIntaH qIrq 'e' vIneH. DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap. Klingonese translation provided by Marc Okrand from my English: "Kirk I want alive. The rest I will grind beneath my boot." Marc told me that literally the line is: "I want that Kirk keeps living. I will mash the others under my boot." [sic! typo for qIrq'e'? (qurgh)] Page 259 qab yon Da'agh. qablIj yon yI'aghHa' 'aghHa'pa' 'etlhwIj. Marc Okrand again translated my English line into Klingon. I gave him "Scrape that smug look from your face before my blade does it for you" and he gave me back this, saying literally it was: "You display a satisfied face. Dis-display your satisfied face before my blade dis-displays it." chobelHa'moH, DI'qar. SajlIj 'oHbe' quvwIj'e'. More Marc Okrand goodness. My line was "You disappoint me, D'Kar. My honor is not your play-thing," and Marc handed back this Klingonese. (Literally: "You displease me, D'Kar. My honor is not your pet.") It was fantastic for Marc to take his time to translate these lines for me, and I owe him big. -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> On Behalf Of De'vID On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 15:58, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de<mailto:levinius@gmx.de>> wrote: Am 06.11.2019 um 22:29 schrieb De'vID:
Recall {DaSwIj bIngDaq latlhpu' vItap} (not {latlh nuvpu' vItap}) from Star Trek Constellations.
What is "Constellations", and where does it have Klingon It was an anthology of Star Trek stories put together for the 40th anniversary: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constellations The story "The Leader" by Dave Galanter contains several sentences in Klingon, translated by Marc Okrand. The author credits Okrand in the authors' annotations supplement: "Klingonese translation provided by Marc Okrand from my English". -- De'vID
Am 07.11.2019 um 17:24 schrieb Steven Boozer:
AFAIK there were six complete sentences. Here they are, followed by the author's annotations from http://www.allyngibson.net/st-const.html :
*From: *De'vID
It was an anthology of Star Trek stories put together for the 40th anniversary: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constellations
Thanks to both of you. This really was new to me. I've added this to the wiki for future reference — in addition, of course, to all of your perfectly maintained databases. wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap! http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Constellations While doing this, I noticed we should / could / might want to find an agreement on abbreviations. In my list, I now have the following identical shorts. Any suggestions to distinguish? STC Star Trek Communicator STC Star Trek: Continuum STC Star Trek Constellations -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Abbreviations
On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 at 08:21, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 07.11.2019 um 17:24 schrieb Steven Boozer:
AFAIK there were six complete sentences. Here they are, followed by the author's annotations from http://www.allyngibson.net/st-const.html :
*From: *De'vID
It was an anthology of Star Trek stories put together for the 40th anniversary: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constellations
Thanks to both of you. This really was new to me. I've added this to the wiki for future reference — in addition, of course, to all of your perfectly maintained databases. wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap!
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Constellations
While doing this, I noticed we should / could / might want to find an agreement on abbreviations. In my list, I now have the following identical shorts. Any suggestions to distinguish?
STC Star Trek Communicator STC Star Trek: Continuum STC Star Trek Constellations
You asked this already in 2016: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2016-July/000740.html {{;-) The answer hasn't changed. Don't use the abbreviation "STC" by itself. In the {boQwI'} sources page <https://github.com/De7vID/klingon-assistant-android/blob/master/app/src/main/res/layout/sources.xml>, I use "STC 104" for the one issue of "Star Trek Communicator" which has Klingon. But otherwise, I just spell out "Star Trek: Continuum" and "Star Trek Constellations" in the entries where these appear, since they appear so rarely. -- De'vID
Am 08.11.2019 um 08:50 schrieb De'vID:
You asked this already in 2016:
Hahaha - thanks for the note. Apparantly, I was not satisfied with that answer ;-) My question came back beause I noticed that "Star Tek Constellations" would also be "STC".
In the {boQwI'} sources page I use "STC 104" for the one issue of "Star Trek Communicator" which has Klingon. But otherwise, I just spell out "Star Trek: Continuum" and "Star Trek Constellations" in the entries where these appear, since they appear so rarely.
That's a good note. I was just hoping that in the meantime, a different solution was found. Thanks. I'll try to remember. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Abbreviations
I’ve never understood why we use so many abbreviations at all, or why we want them to have three characters. We use computers. Spelling out the whole term is really not that hard, and there’s always copy/paste. We could use STCmr, STCnm, and STCns or some such, or we could just use numbers and make everybody look them up in a table. Or we could use whole words so everyone would always know what we’re talking about. Sent from my iPad
On Nov 8, 2019, at 3:12 AM, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 08.11.2019 um 08:50 schrieb De'vID:
You asked this already in 2016:
Hahaha - thanks for the note. Apparantly, I was not satisfied with that answer ;-)
My question came back beause I noticed that "Star Tek Constellations" would also be "STC".
In the {boQwI'} sources page I use "STC 104" for the one issue of "Star Trek Communicator" which has Klingon. But otherwise, I just spell out "Star Trek: Continuum" and "Star Trek Constellations" in the entries where these appear, since they appear so rarely.
That's a good note. I was just hoping that in the meantime, a different solution was found. Thanks. I'll try to remember.
-- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Abbreviations _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Am 08.11.2019 um 13:07 schrieb Will Martin:
Spelling out the whole term is really not that hard, and there’s always copy/paste.
Abbreviations are very useful when the ratio between the name and the quoted text is appropriate; For instance, if I'd say "TKD has more words than KGT, and all new words from TKW are listed in KGT" writing these titles would take more space than the rest of the sentence. I've decided to do a mix of both, i.e. keeping common things abbreviated, and rare things like "Constellations" can be written out compeltely. Anyone can do what they want; I just wanted to find a common agreement, to avoid a mixture like for Discovery, some people use STD, then the people at Memory Alpha abbreviate DIS, even though DSC has been offically proclaimed as the way to do it (but they also use the silly word "Klingonese" all over the place, so who cares) -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Abbreviations
Some may prefer DIS to STD because of the common (at least in the US) abbreviation STD for "sexually transmitted disease". E.g. "Do you smoke? Drink? Any STDs?" Voragh -----Original Message----------Original Message----------Original Message----------Original Message----- From: Lieven L. Litaer Anyone can do what they want; I just wanted to find a common agreement, to avoid a mixture like for Discovery, some people use STD, then the people at Memory Alpha abbreviate DIS, even though DSC has been offically proclaimed as the way to do it (but they also use the silly word "Klingonese" all over the place, so who cares)
Some apparently prefer to call it STD *because* of the disease connection. The point is that Memory Alpha’s decision makers have decided to abbreviate it as DIS, contrary to the official CBS usage of DSC. They have a reputation for ignoring established convention when it contradicts an early decision of theirs, and for invoking “common usage” when they insist on sticking with something that’s not supported by canon. -- ghunchu'wI'
On Nov 8, 2019, at 10:29 AM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
Some may prefer DIS to STD because of the common (at least in the US) abbreviation STD for "sexually transmitted disease". E.g. "Do you smoke? Drink? Any STDs?"
Voragh
De’vID’s solution of spelling them out in full is probably the best. FWIW in my own notes I’ve used: STConst = Star Trek Constellations anthology ST:C = Star Trek: Continuum web site STC #104 = Star Trek Communicator issue 104 Voragh ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> On Behalf Of De'vID On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 at 08:21, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de<mailto:levinius@gmx.de>> wrote: Am 07.11.2019 um 17:24 schrieb Steven Boozer:
AFAIK there were six complete sentences. Here they are, followed by the author's annotations from http://www.allyngibson.net/st-const.html :
*From: *De'vID
It was an anthology of Star Trek stories put together for the 40th anniversary: https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Constellations
Thanks to both of you. This really was new to me. I've added this to the wiki for future reference — in addition, of course, to all of your perfectly maintained databases. wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap! http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Constellations While doing this, I noticed we should / could / might want to find an agreement on abbreviations. In my list, I now have the following identical shorts. Any suggestions to distinguish? STC Star Trek Communicator STC Star Trek: Continuum STC Star Trek Constellations You asked this already in 2016: http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2016-July/000740.html {{;-) The answer hasn't changed. Don't use the abbreviation "STC" by itself. In the {boQwI'} sources page<https://github.com/De7vID/klingon-assistant-android/blob/master/app/src/main/res/layout/sources.xml>, I use "STC 104" for the one issue of "Star Trek Communicator" which has Klingon. But otherwise, I just spell out "Star Trek: Continuum" and "Star Trek Constellations" in the entries where these appear, since they appear so rarely.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 10:23 AM mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Suppose I write:
{raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH; pa' Qotbogh je nuvpu'vaD jatlh..}
for:
"the emperor was reclining next to the table; he said for the people who were reclining there too.."
Would the klingon sentence be grammatically correct ? I'm troubled by the {je} following a {-bogh} clause,
Why? The sentence would be fine if it weren't in a *-bogh* clause: *pa' Qot je nuvpu'* "people reclined there also", "people and others (i.e. the emperor) reclined there". Should be fine to use it in a *-bogh* clause. and I don't know whether the {pa'} can refer *only* to the {Qotbogh}.
It's more likely that people will interpret it as applying to the relative clause, not the whole sentence with *jatlh*, since it's closer to the relative clause. If someone interprets it as applying to *jatlh*, then you just get "he said there, to the people also reclining..." It's not quite the same, but if the people are within earshot, then they're probably in the same basic location the emperor is, so the intended meaning will still probably get across. I'm not sure the suggested *latlh* is wholly necessary -- if the emperor is talking to them, the reader will probably be able to conclude that they are different people from the emperor.
On 11/6/2019 10:05 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Suppose I write:
{raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH; pa' Qotbogh je nuvpu'vaD jatlh..}
for:
"the emperor was reclining next to the table; he said for the people who were reclining there too.."
Would the klingon sentence be grammatically correct ? I'm troubled by the {je} following a {-bogh} clause, and I don't know whether the {pa'} can refer *only* to the {Qotbogh}.
I know I could express the desired meaning in other ways too, but I can't stop wondering whether the klingon sentence is actually correct.
As others have said, it's not grammatically wrong, but it is difficult to follow, with a locative attached to a relative clause attached to a beneficiary attached to a verb. You can simplify it: *raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH latlh je; latlhvaD jatlh voDleH...* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
I like this version MUCH better, since the earlier suggestions seem to be stretching grammar to avoid the “cat in the hat” problem. The original was basically trying to say, “The emperor spoke for those who reclined where he reclined,” and the “where he reclined” is problematic because it really wants to to be a relative clause with the location as the head noun. We can’t do that. So, {SuStel} avoids the problem entirely by setting the location as a context grammatically independent of the sentence with {jatlh} as the main verb. We already know where the reclining was happening. We know everyone who was reclining. That’s context. He spoke to the others there. The semicolons could be periods. It doesn’t really matter. We don’t know that the Klingon language distinguishes between the two. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Nov 6, 2019, at 10:52 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 11/6/2019 10:05 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Suppose I write:
{raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH; pa' Qotbogh je nuvpu'vaD jatlh..}
for:
"the emperor was reclining next to the table; he said for the people who were reclining there too.."
Would the klingon sentence be grammatically correct ? I'm troubled by the {je} following a {-bogh} clause, and I don't know whether the {pa'} can refer *only* to the {Qotbogh}.
I know I could express the desired meaning in other ways too, but I can't stop wondering whether the klingon sentence is actually correct. As others have said, it's not grammatically wrong, but it is difficult to follow, with a locative attached to a relative clause attached to a beneficiary attached to a verb.
You can simplify it: raS retlhDaq Qot voDleH latlh je; latlhvaD jatlh voDleH...
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name <http://trimboli.name/>_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
participants (9)
-
Alan Anderson -
De'vID -
Felix Malmenbeck -
Lieven L. Litaer -
mayqel qunen'oS -
nIqolay Q -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel -
Will Martin