Suppose I write: {'elaDya' SepDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}. This would mean: "there are ancient cats at the region of greece". Now, suppose I write: {'elaDya' DaqDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'} The way I understand it, this would mean "there are ancient cats at the site/location of greece". And the only difference I "feel", is that perhaps this sentence focuses more on the "location". However, since I'm not a native english speaker, I wonder: Meaning-wise, what's the actual difference between this and the first sentence ? Do you, as native american speakers, "feel" any difference between these two sentences ? ~ bara'qa'
On 11/13/2019 10:41 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Suppose I write:
{'elaDya' SepDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}.
This would mean: "there are ancient cats at the region of greece".
Now, suppose I write:
{'elaDya' DaqDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}
The way I understand it, this would mean "there are ancient cats at the site/location of greece". And the only difference I "feel", is that perhaps this sentence focuses more on the "location".
However, since I'm not a native english speaker, I wonder:
Meaning-wise, what's the actual difference between this and the first sentence ?
Do you, as native american speakers, "feel" any difference between these two sentences ?
You're too focused on how the translation "feels" rather than what the Klingon actually says. Sometimes a single Klingon syntactic structure will "feel" differently with different semantics. For example, you could say *nuH pegh DaSov'a'*/Do you know the secret of the weapon? Do you know the weapon's secret?/ Both English versions a perfectly fine. But if you say *'elaDya' Sep DaSov'a',* it sounds fine as /Do you know the country of Greece?/ but it doesn't work at all as /Do you know Greece's country?/ Identical syntax in Klingon doesn't mean entirely identical syntax in English translations. In this case there is a difference because it is common to refer to a region by name *('elaDya' Sep)* but not any old site by name *('elaDya' Daq).* The first one will be interpreted as the region named Greece; the second one will be interpreted as a site in Greece (a /Greece site/), not as the place named Greece. *'elaDya'* is a *Sep,* not a *Daq,* even if it is technically a *Daq* in a strict semantic sense. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
“Region of Greece” feels more natural. Using “site” like that is usually couple by an event or specific thing — “the site of the battle over the ancient cat”, “the site where the oracle of Delphi was located”. So the English of be second one feels… odd. Klingon-wise, since ‘eladya’ is a definable place, using ‘eladya’ Daq feels redundant in that context, but it doesn’t really jump out at me in the same way that the English phrasing does. —jevreH Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 13, 2019, at 10:41, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
Suppose I write:
{'elaDya' SepDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}.
This would mean: "there are ancient cats at the region of greece".
Now, suppose I write:
{'elaDya' DaqDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}
The way I understand it, this would mean "there are ancient cats at the site/location of greece". And the only difference I "feel", is that perhaps this sentence focuses more on the "location".
However, since I'm not a native english speaker, I wonder:
Meaning-wise, what's the actual difference between this and the first sentence ?
Do you, as native american speakers, "feel" any difference between these two sentences ?
~ bara'qa' _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
I assume you are distinguishing between (modern) Greece vs. the (ancient) Greek cultural region (Greece proper, Macedonia, Cyprus, Ionia, Magna Graecia, etc.)? In which case I would say {'elaDya'Daq} vs. {'elaDya' SepDaq}. I would not use {'elaDya' DaqDaq} "in the site/place/location of Greece" unless I were, say, pointing at a spot on a map. Although it's grammatical, we've never seen {DaqDaq} except for the odd-sounding: QongDaqDaq Qotbe' tlhInganpu' Klingons do not lie in bed. TKW and that's because {QongDaq} is a specific noun meaning bed Voragh -----Original Message----------Original Message----------Original Message----- From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> On Behalf Of mayqel qunen'oS Suppose I write: {'elaDya' SepDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}. This would mean: "there are ancient cats at the region of greece". Now, suppose I write: {'elaDya' DaqDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'} The way I understand it, this would mean "there are ancient cats at the site/location of greece". And the only difference I "feel", is that perhaps this sentence focuses more on the "location". However, since I'm not a native english speaker, I wonder: Meaning-wise, what's the actual difference between this and the first sentence ? Do you, as native american speakers, "feel" any difference between these two sentences ?
ok, I understand so far. But being on the subject.. If I wrote {'elaDya' puHDaq}, could this mean "at the land of greece", as in "land=country" ? Or does the klingon {puH} refer only to "land" as in "ground" ? It's not that the {Sep}, insulted my mother or something, so I don't want to use it.. But I'm trying to understand, how things work.. ~ gha'cher qIj
Given the canon derivatives of puH, it does seem like puH refers to land as a geographical feature rather than a region of land. Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 13, 2019, at 12:54, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
ok, I understand so far.
But being on the subject..
If I wrote {'elaDya' puHDaq}, could this mean "at the land of greece", as in "land=country" ?
Or does the klingon {puH} refer only to "land" as in "ground" ?
It's not that the {Sep}, insulted my mother or something, so I don't want to use it..
But I'm trying to understand, how things work..
~ gha'cher qIj _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
puH beQ plains, flatlands (n) puH Duj car (n) puH nIl grassland, steppe (n) puH yIQ swamp, wetlands (n) puHley' cape, point (n) 'Iw bIQtIqvo' toS SuvwI' yoH puH QaDDaq paw The fearless warrior climbs out of the blood onto dry land. (PB) And sometimes it's useful to see how Okrand uses the English term: (KGT 16): The Klingon Homeworld Qo'noS, usually rendered Kronos in Federation Standard, is a planet with basically one very large mass of land surrounded by ocean; perhaps continent is a comparable concept. (KGT 36ff.): Some houses are particularly wealthy, controlling vast lands by means of armed forces loyal to the particular house. [...] If the High Council determines an action to be dishonorable [...] it may also seize the house's lands, forces, and other holdings. -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons -----Original Message----------Original Message----------Original Message----------Original Message----- From: Jeffrey Clark Given the canon derivatives of puH, it does seem like puH refers to land as a geographical feature rather than a region of land.
On Nov 13, 2019, at 12:54, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
If I wrote {'elaDya' puHDaq}, could this mean "at the land of greece", as in "land=country" ? Or does the klingon {puH} refer only to "land" as in "ground" ? It's not that the {Sep}, insulted my mother or something, so I don't want to use it.. But I'm trying to understand, how things work..
Am 13.11.2019 um 16:41 schrieb mayqel qunen'oS:
Suppose I write: {'elaDya' DaqDaq vIghro'mey tIQ tu'lu'}
At qepHom 2019, Marc Okrand said that this is not his only or definite answer, but I felt that {'elaDya' Daq} sounds weird in the first place. It reminded him of a puzzle made of country-shaped puzzle tiles, and if the greece tile was the only one missing, you could say that is the {'elaDya' Daq} — the place where you would put the greece tile. More may come later. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/StarTrekDiscovery
participants (5)
-
Jeffrey Clark -
Lieven L. Litaer -
mayqel qunen'oS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel