Re: [tlhIngan Hol] vengDaq, vengmeyDaq je
And since we are on the subject.. It was a crucial point in my journey in this language, when I realized that: Even if it is possible to translate something word-by word into klingon, then this doesn't necessarily guarantee that the klingon will sound the same way as the original. So, the intent shouldn't be to convey the words of the original in klingon; it should rather be to convey the context, and most importantly the feeling. The classic example is king Leonidas "molon lave" to the persians. In ancient Greek it is sub-zero cool. I would pay real money, to see the look on the persian's face when he heard it. In english "come and get them", it sounds defiant, but not so much as the original. In klingon {naDev yIghoS 'ej tISuq} its mediocre. And in modern Greek it sounds so ridiculous, that each time someone said it, Leonidas would be rolling in his grave. It's not whether klingon has all the words to provide for word-by word translations; it is humanly impossible for someone to recreate in a constructed language, the entire vocabulary of a real language. It is rather using the existing tools to convey the intented meaning and most of all the intented feeling. qunnoq On Sep 6, 2017 11:49, "mayqel qunenoS" <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote: The problem with {ngIq} is that its use hasn't been completely clarified. If I was to translate the original sentence, then perhaps I would write: Daw'choH wa' veng; ngugh Daw'choH je Hoch latlh veng. One city begun to revolt; then each additional city begun to revolt too. or Daw'choH wa' veng; ngugh wa'DIch Da Hoch latlh veng. One city begun to revolt; then each additional city behaved as the first. or Daw'choH wa' veng; ngugh veng wa'DIch Da Hoch latlh veng. One city begun to revolt; then each additional city behaved as the first city. or Daw'choH wa' veng; ngugh Daw'choH je wa' latlh veng. 'ej ngugh latlh veng, 'ej ngugh latlh.. tagha' Daw' Hoch vengmey. One city begun to revolt; then one other city revolted too. And then another city, and then another.. Finally all cities revolted. Of the above, my favourite way to describe the original intented sentence, is the last. qunnoq On Sep 6, 2017 08:53, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 6, 2017 10:19, "Anthony Appleyard" <a.appleyard@btinternet.com> wrote:
An expression meaning "in succession" seems to be needed.
qatlh yapbe' {ngIq}?
-- De'vID
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Wednesday, 6 September 2017 12:02:17 BST mayqel qunenoS wrote:
The classic example is king Leonidas "molon labe" to the persians.
In ancient Greek it is sub-zero cool. I would pay real money, to see the look on the persian's face when he heard it.
In english "come and get them", it sounds defiant, but not so much as the original.
In klingon {naDev yIghoS 'ej tISuq} its mediocre.
I feel, there are stages in translating something. Often the early stages will be overly wordy and still too close to a word-for word translation. And if you submit a version too early Qov shouts at you. Further iterations can pare down to something closer to the intent. Perhaps to something like this with an optional {ghIq}. {ghoghoS (ghIq) tItlhap!} paqbatlh has a few examples of different ways to say "one by one" which could also be used as a basis of translations of the other phrase. Here's a couple that omit {ngIq}: {Hegh wa' ghIq Hegh latlh.} glossed as "one-by-one they fell" {wa' qa' nuD veqlargh, latlh qa' nuD veqlargh.} glossed as "the Fek'lhr inspects them one by one" Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]".
-----Original Message----- From: Jeremy Silver paqbatlh has a few examples of different ways to say "one by one" which could also be used as a basis of translations of the other phrase. Here's a couple that omit {ngIq}: {Hegh wa' ghIq Hegh latlh.} glossed as "one-by-one they fell" {wa' qa' nuD veqlargh, latlh qa' nuD veqlargh.} glossed as "the Fek'lhr inspects them one by one" Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]". ______________________________________________ Interesting; I was thinking of {latlh} just last night. Some examples of {ngIq} for comparison: ngIq nuv luHoH they killed the warriors one by one. ('u'-OPERA) yerchajvo' Haw' qamchIynganpu' ngIq nuv luHoH The people of Qam-Chee, they fled their territory, and were killed one by one (PB) nIteb chegh molor ngIq ghoqwI' One by one Molor's scouts return (PB) ngIq raQvaD cha'maH vagh QaS yInob For each outpost pay 25 forces. (MKE) ngIq gholvaD vaghmaH QaS yInob Pay each player 50 forces. (MKE) ngIq gholvo' wa'maH QaS yItlhap Collect 10 forces from every player. (MKE) BTW notice the absence of {-taH} or {-qa'} on the verbs. -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver <jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]".
I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs." -- De'vID
About the two meanings of {yIntagh} (swear word epithet and "life support system"). Thinking entirely within the real world, some may say that it is merely an oversight by Marc Okrand which we are now stuck with. What is the first use of "yIntagh"? Was in a bit of Klingon text which was recorded, and then the scriptwriters changed the English, so that the Klingon had to be retrofitted to another English translation? (This is how {-pu'}, originally intended as only as a verb perfective suffix, came also to mean "plural of being who can talk".) ({yIn tagh} as two words means "life lung") Within the Star Trek scenario, it could be from two words which were formerly pronounced distinctively but came to be pronounced the same (such as "feet" and "feat"), or from two words from different traditions (such as "damn" from Latin and "dam" which was native English).
On 9/9/2017 1:24 AM, Anthony Appleyard wrote:
What is the first use of "yIntagh"? Was in a bit of Klingon text which was recorded, and then the scriptwriters changed the English, so that the Klingon had to be retrofitted to another English translation? (This is how {-pu'}, originally intended as only as a verb perfective suffix, came also to mean "plural of being who can talk".) ({yIn tagh} as two words means "life lung")
From /Star Trek: The Next Generation/, "Redemption, Part 1" LURSA Members of the High Council, it is a day of great rejoicing for the family of Duras and the Klingon Empire. We have discovered that our brother did indeed have a son and heir. GOWRON This is an outrage! Duras had no mate. Where did you find him, Lursa? In a harlot's bed chamber? TORAL I will personally cut your tongue out, Yintagh! GOWRON Impudent wretch. I see two possibilities. Either the writers just made something up from scratch, which just happened to be identical to the word for /life-support system,/ or they opened /The Klingon Dictionary,/ couldn't find the word they were looking for, and picked one at random or one which they thought sounded good. I see no reason to believe the writers ever had any actual knowledge of *tlhIngan Hol.* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 9 September 2017 at 14:45, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
I see two possibilities. Either the writers just made something up from scratch, which just happened to be identical to the word for life-support system, or they opened The Klingon Dictionary, couldn't find the word they were looking for, and picked one at random or one which they thought sounded good. I see no reason to believe the writers ever had any actual knowledge of tlhIngan Hol.
The shooting script (http://www.st-minutiae.com/resources/scripts/200.txt) contains this bit of delight: PICARD Qaja plu d'itch jung. La woq you ghir klas qimha. Gowron. Doj hon. Doj hon. KTAL Your Klingon is flawless, Picard. Not even a trace of a human accent. The Council thanks you for your service to the Empire. I believe that line was cut from the actual episode (and thankfully so). See also the "pronunciation guide" at the link for some laughs. Clearly, the writers made stuff up without consulting Okrand or anybody who actually knows Klingon. -- De'vID
I suppose that Toral's use of the word "yIntagh" could be retro-interpreted as one of:- (1) "I will wound you so badly that you will need a life-support system." (2) "You have no more intelligence than the life-support system's computer." As regards (2), in the real world yesterday my phone line went dead, and I reported the fault from a neighbour's phone, and I had to cope for the first time with a voice-recognition system, and it misheard my first answer completely and linked me to the police!! ----Original message---- From : sustel@trimboli.name Date : 09/09/2017 - 13:45 (GMTST) To : tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org Subject : Re: [tlhIngan Hol] yIntagh ... TORAL I will personally cut your tongue out, Yintagh! ...
{yIntagh} appeared in the KCD novelization (page reference lacking): "What kind of a *yInTagh* bar is this?" And was explained in KCD itself: "This is one of a number of Klingon curses that doesn't have an adequate translation." Was KCD produced before or after TNG "Redemption, Part I"? Later DeCandido -- who often consulted Okrand -- used it in his novel "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (page reference lacking): "... a tornado came, one that was far stronger than our {yIntagh} of a governor said it would be." -- Voragh ----------------------------------------Original Message--------------------------------------------- From: SuStel On 9/9/2017 1:24 AM, Anthony Appleyard wrote: About the two meanings of {yIntagh} (swear word epithet and "life support system"). Thinking entirely within the real world, some may say that it is merely an oversight by Marc Okrand which we are now stuck with. What is the first use of "yIntagh"? Was in a bit of Klingon text which was recorded, and then the scriptwriters changed the English, so that the Klingon had to be retrofitted to another English translation? (This is how {-pu'}, originally intended as only as a verb perfective suffix, came also to mean "plural of being who can talk".) ({yIn tagh} as two words means "life lung") Within the Star Trek scenario, it could be from two words which were formerly pronounced distinctively but came to be pronounced the same (such as "feet" and "feat"), or from two words from different traditions (such as "damn" from Latin and "dam" which was native English). From Star Trek: The Next Generation, "Redemption, Part 1" LURSA Members of the High Council, it is a day of great rejoicing for the family of Duras and the Klingon Empire. We have discovered that our brother did indeed have a son and heir. GOWRON This is an outrage! Duras had no mate. Where did you find him, Lursa? In a harlot's bed chamber? TORAL I will personally cut your tongue out, Yintagh! GOWRON Impudent wretch. I see two possibilities. Either the writers just made something up from scratch, which just happened to be identical to the word for life-support system, or they opened The Klingon Dictionary, couldn't find the word they were looking for, and picked one at random or one which they thought sounded good. I see no reason to believe the writers ever had any actual knowledge of tlhIngan Hol. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 9/13/2017 10:29 AM, Steven Boozer wrote:
{yIntagh} [...]
was explained in KCD itself:
"This is one of a number of Klingon curses that doesn't have an adequate translation."
If *yIntagh* does not have an adequate translation, this suggests that the translation of the curse word is not /life-support system,/ despite attempts to wrangle a curse out of that meaning. The words are homophones, not the same word. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Later DeCandido -- who often consulted Okrand -- used it in his novel "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (page reference lacking):
I don't think he's consulted him particularly often; the only book with a glossary vetted by Okrand was Diplomatic Implausibilty. Some of his novels have had glossaries vetted by Lawrence M. Schoen, however.
13 sep. 2017 kl. 16:29 skrev Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>:
Later DeCandido -- who often consulted Okrand -- used it in his novel "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (page reference lacking):
Your're right. A more thorough search of my notes found: DIPLOMATIC IMPLAUSIBILITY: "Helpful people include Dr. Lawrence M. Schoen and his cronies at the Klingon Language Institute and the aforementioned Marc Okrand, who kept my linguistics straight and vetted the glossary." "Marc only vetted the first [novel], in DIPLOMATIC IMPLAUSIBILITY -- after that, they vetted by @klingonguy & the Klingon Language Institute." [https://twitter.com/#!/KRADeC/status/91641513691459584]), "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (KEBH), and his IKS Gorkon series of novels ("A Good Day to Die"; "Honor Bound"; "Enemy Territory" [Acknowledgments: "... Dr. Lawrence Schoen, head of the Klingon Language Institute, for consistent linguistic aid, and also to Dr. Marc Okrand, who created the Klingon language in the first place..."] Spelling in DeCandido's "The Klingon Art of War" vetted by Okrand. (Spelling only, not usage or grammar presumably.) yIvoq 'ach yI'ol! -- Voragh -------------------------Original Message----------------------- From: Felix Malmenbeck
Later DeCandido -- who often consulted Okrand -- used it in his novel "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (page reference lacking):
I don't think he's consulted him particularly often; the only book with a glossary vetted by Okrand was Diplomatic Implausibilty. Some of his novels have had glossaries vetted by Lawrence M. Schoen, however.
13 sep. 2017 kl. 16:29 skrev Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>:
Later DeCandido -- who often consulted Okrand -- used it in his novel "Klingon Empire: A Burning House" (page reference lacking):
When using novels by DeCandido as a source, keep in mind that this is the guy that used {QongDaqpu'} in one of his books.
Am 13.09.2017 um 19:33 schrieb Michael Roney, Jr.:
When using novels by DeCandido as a source, keep in mind that this is the guy that used {QongDaqpu'} in one of his books.
Or remember that only some works were vetted, others are not. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/KeithDeCandido
Am 09.09.2017 um 00:26 schrieb De'vID:
I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs."
That would explain why we got the word for "cell" at qep'a' 2016. And lots more, probably. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver <jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]".
I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs."
Indeed, for this excercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm /still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet. {nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.} The facebook group has multiple possible translations of the last bit, and I just chose the shortest version of my own attempt. Replacing with a superlative construction moves it closer to an exact translation but increases the compexity a bit more.
On 9/9/2017 4:31 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver<jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]". I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs." Indeed, for this excercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm/still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet.
{nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.}
This doesn't work. *ghIq* is an adverbial; it attaches to sentences, not nouns. If you're sticking with formal grammar, you can't just stick the translation of the phrase /atom by atom/ in front of *nutammoH.* You could say *ngIq HeySelmaj tammoH* /they silence our atoms one by one./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 13:52:00 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/9/2017 4:31 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver<jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]".
I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs."
Indeed, for this excercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm/still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet.
{nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.}
This doesn't work. *ghIq* is an adverbial; it attaches to sentences, not nouns.
Good point, but I'm not too sure it's the atoms that are doing the silencing. So how about this instead?: {nughoStaH chaH. latlh HeySel qa'taHvIS wa' HeySel, nutammoH chaH. latlh HanDI' qa'taHvIS wa' HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.}
On 9/10/2017 8:39 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 13:52:00 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/9/2017 4:31 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver<jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]". I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs." Indeed, for this excercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm/still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet.
{nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.} This doesn't work.*ghIq* is an adverbial; it attaches to sentences, not nouns.
Good point, but I'm not too sure it's the atoms that are doing the silencing.
/They/ are doing the silencing. The atoms are being silenced. What else does /atom by atom, they will silence us/ mean?
So how about this instead?:
{nughoStaH chaH. latlh HeySel qa'taHvIS wa' HeySel, nutammoH chaH.
/While one atom replaces another atom, they silence us./ I have no idea what this means. I also don't like how *latlh* precedes *wa';* you haven't introduced the *wa'* yet that can have a *latlh.*
latlh HanDI' qa'taHvIS wa' HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj.
/While one cell replaces another cell, our spirits become their spirits./ If this is supposed to suggest an agency by which our spirits become their spirits, it fails to do so. It only suggests simultaneity. One thing happens at the same time as another; one thing does not happen by means of the other. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Sunday, 10 September 2017 20:03:30 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/10/2017 8:39 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 13:52:00 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/9/2017 4:31 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver<jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk>
wrote:
Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by atom [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]".
I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs."
Indeed, for this exercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm/still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet.
{nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.}
This doesn't work.*ghIq* is an adverbial; it attaches to sentences, not nouns.
Good point, but I'm not too sure it's the atoms that are doing the silencing. /They/ are doing the silencing. The atoms are being silenced. What else does /atom by atom, they will silence us/ mean?
So how about this instead?:
{nughoStaH chaH. latlh HeySel qa'taHvIS wa' HeySel, nutammoH chaH.
/While one atom replaces another atom, they silence us./
I have no idea what this means. I also don't like how *latlh* precedes *wa';* you haven't introduced the *wa'* yet that can have a *latlh.*
Thanks for your further suggestions. I think that neither of us really know what the original means as we're lacking a fair bit of context. But I'm going with the interpretation that the "they" which is approaching is the same "they" doing the silencing, and this "they" is not atoms or cells. I'll take a wild stab that it's some species, say Humans approaching, that will be causing some molecular/cellular alteration to change the look of the Klingon species. I could swap the clauses to {wa' HeySel qa'taHvIS latlh HeySel}, and with this verb it could well work. But as I understand it, Klingon sentences are OVS, and {wa' HeySel} is the subject, is it not?
latlh HanDI' qa'taHvIS wa' HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj.
/While one cell replaces another cell, our spirits become their spirits./
If this is supposed to suggest an agency by which our spirits become their spirits, it fails to do so. It only suggests simultaneity. One thing happens at the same time as another; one thing does not happen by means of the other.
As I interpret the original phrase, I believe simultaneity is all I need to suggest. We have nothing in the original, that I can tell, that suggests agency specific to the atoms or cells. It seems to be just events/mutation/ disease happening, but I am frequently wrong.
On 9/10/2017 6:57 PM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Sunday, 10 September 2017 20:03:30 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/10/2017 8:39 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Saturday, 9 September 2017 13:52:00 BST SuStel wrote:
On 9/9/2017 4:31 AM, Jeremy Silver wrote:
On Friday, 8 September 2017 23:26:13 BST De'vID wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 15:15, Jeremy Silver<jp.silver@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > Still, on a related note, I've been having problems recently trying to > figure out a reasonable way, with or without {ngIq}, to say "atom by > atom > [something happens]" and "cell by cell [something else happens]". I presume this has to do with this DSC promo? https://twitter.com/StarTrekNetflix/status/901134702622367748 "Atom by atom, they will silence us. Cell by cell, our souls shall become theirs." Indeed, for this exercise I think I settled on this version (which omits ngIq) for the whole promo text. Even after re-reading mayqel's thread and this one a few times, I'm/still/ not clear how to use ngIq for my own purposes yet.
{nughoStaH chaH. wa' HeySel ghIq latlh HeySel, nutammoH chaH. wa' HanDI' ghIq latlh HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. tlhIngan maHtaHmeH maghobnIS. potlhchu' meqvam.} This doesn't work.*ghIq* is an adverbial; it attaches to sentences, not nouns. Good point, but I'm not too sure it's the atoms that are doing the silencing. /They/ are doing the silencing. The atoms are being silenced. What else does /atom by atom, they will silence us/ mean?
So how about this instead?:
{nughoStaH chaH. latlh HeySel qa'taHvIS wa' HeySel, nutammoH chaH. /While one atom replaces another atom, they silence us./
I have no idea what this means. I also don't like how *latlh* precedes *wa';* you haven't introduced the *wa'* yet that can have a *latlh.*
Thanks for your further suggestions.
I think that neither of us really know what the original means as we're lacking a fair bit of context. But I'm going with the interpretation that the "they" which is approaching is the same "they" doing the silencing, and this "they" is not atoms or cells. I'll take a wild stab that it's some species, say Humans approaching, that will be causing some molecular/cellular alteration to change the look of the Klingon species.
My version doesn't say that the cells are doing the silencing. I said *ngIq HeySelmaj tammoH*/they silence our atoms one by one. /I didn't need to define who /they/ are; I just made the atoms the object of the sentence.
I could swap the clauses to {wa' HeySel qa'taHvIS latlh HeySel}, and with this verb it could well work. But as I understand it, Klingon sentences are OVS, and {wa' HeySel} is the subject, is it not?
Sure, and in Klingon subjects come last. But you're thinking in English. In English, you'd say /while one atom replaces another atom./ You wouldn't say /while another atom replaces one atom,/ because you haven't established /another what?/ The same ordering happens in Klingon, only this time you mention the object first.
latlh HanDI' qa'taHvIS wa' HanDI', qa'chaj moj qa'maj. /While one cell replaces another cell, our spirits become their spirits./
If this is supposed to suggest an agency by which our spirits become their spirits, it fails to do so. It only suggests simultaneity. One thing happens at the same time as another; one thing does not happen by means of the other. As I interpret the original phrase, I believe simultaneity is all I need to suggest. We have nothing in the original, that I can tell, that suggests agency specific to the atoms or cells. It seems to be just events/mutation/ disease happening, but I am frequently wrong.
I didn't suggest the cells have agency, and that was my point. Something /else/ has agency: the /they,/ whoever /they/ are. But in my version, /they/ are explicitly acting upon the atoms. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (9)
-
Anthony Appleyard -
De'vID -
Felix Malmenbeck -
Jeremy Silver -
Lieven -
mayqel qunenoS -
Michael Roney, Jr. -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel