Sentence Construction / Translation Questions

[kreide2000]

Hello everybody.

I've been reading up on Klingon for a little while now (been checking out some websites, did as much of the postal course as is available on the net, and bought the Klingon Dictionary), and I've decided to try translating some stuff to see how much I really understand.

I don't feel I'm having too much trouble with simple sentences, but then I came upon this one:

"When you speak or act, if your mind is impure, pain will follow you, as the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart."

I translated it like so:
bIjatlhDI’ qoj bIvangDI’, watlhHa’chugh yab, Dutlha’ ‘oy’, ‘ej tepqengwI’ tlha’moHbogh *ox* tlha’DI’ rutlh, rup.

1) Can you join two -DI' clauses with qoj like I've done?
2) How about using an ej ... -DI' ... rup construction to translate the clause starting with "as..."?  It seems a little clunky to me.  Is there a consensus on a proper Klingon way to translate such a construction?

Looking forward to any and all comments and suggestions.

kreide

[QoghtlhIH'u']

Very interesting grammatical question, kreide2000!

But first the -DI' suffix: I think it really means as soon as, so in your sentence I would prefer -chugh

Then: your mind is yablIj
Never mind the clunkiness, tlhIngan Hol is not English or Italian. If you go on with this language there will be examples of sentences where the Klingon is far more elegant than the English version, but also vice versa.
Instead of rup you need rap or rur

bIjatlhchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj qoj bIvangchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj vaj Dutlha' 'oy'  'e'  tepqengwI’ tlha'moHbogh *ox*  tlha'bogh rutlh rur
If you speak while your mind is impure or if you act while your mind is impure then pain will follow you, that resembles a wheel that follows an ox that draws the cart.

I am not all too happy about my version, not because of the repetition of while your mind is impure but because of the way the ox-part is joined to the first part.

Maybe if we rephrase it:
watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj  bIjatlhchugh  qoj bIvangchugh vaj Dutlha' 'oy'  'e'  tepqengwI’ tlha'moHbogh *ox*  tlha'bogh rutlh rur

While your mind is impure if you speak or if you act then pain will follow you, that resembles a wheel that follows a cartdrawing ox.
Now find a Klingon cartdrawing animal!
Did you make tlha'moH , cause to follow, up?

QoghtlhIH'u'

Edit I first wrote wIj instead of lIj
wathl changed to watlh

[Qunchuy]

But first the -DI' suffix: I think it really means as soon as, so in your sentence I would prefer -chugh

On the other hand, I think -DI' carries exactly the intended meaning. The first part of the sentence, with qoj between verbs bearing -DI', seems perfectly reasonable to me.

bIjatlhchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj qoj bIvangchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj vaj Dutlha' 'oy'  'e'  tepqengwI’ tlha'moHbogh *ox*  tlha'bogh rutlh rur
If you speak while your mind is impure or if you act while your mind is impure then pain will follow you, that resembles a wheel that follows an ox that draws the cart.

The pronoun 'e' doesn't work the way you've used it. It can only be the object of a sentence, but you seem to be trying to force it into service as a subject.

kreide2000, trying to translate such a long and complex English sentence into a long and complex Klingon sentence usually ends up with the result being very hard to understand. Even if you can show it to be grammatically correct, it is probably better to break it into multiple sentences in Klingon.

bIjatlhDI' qoj bIvangDI', watlhHa'chugh yablIj, Dutlha' 'oy'. tep luHbogh Sargh tlha'bogh rutlh'e' rur 'oy'vam.
When you speak or act, if your mind is impure, pain follows you. This pain resembles a wheel which follows the Sark that pulls the cargo.

The tepqengwI' depicted on the Bird of Prey poster shows a stationary crane-like object, so I don't think it's an appropriate rendition of "cart". I chose to ignore the vehicle and just speak of the beast yanking the cargo. The word tlha'moH is a good one, but with the emphasis on tlha' to either side of it, I think it distracts from the meaning.

[kreide2000]

Thanks for the comments so far.

QoghtlhIH'u', yep. I made up tlha'moH.  I couldn't find a word for "pull" in Klingon.  So I figured could make one with the help of some suffixes. 

Qunchuy, I came across Sargh when looking for an cow-like animal, but just decided on *ox*.  I'd thought for a moment to transliterate the scientific name (taurus -> taw'ruS), but I wasn't sure if that was an acceptable practice.

I didn't even think of luH.  It seems a little harsh, but this is Klingon....

kreide

[QoghtlhIH'u']

Yes Qunchuy,
Before 'e' we should have the object, in the Object Verb Subject sense, of the entire construction. It was already bothering me. I prefer your solution with two sentences.
I see that you left the "nested" use of bogh intact
tep luHbogh Sargh tlha'bogh rutlh'e'

I also thought luH is a bit odd but indeed, this is Klingon. The last days I have been listening to the audio mp3's. It was really like listening to an actual very real introduction to a "foreign" culture which is very harsh indeed, especially the travelling dialogues!

About the cart:
On Conversational Klingon I heard the word lupwI' which was translated as jitney. Now I don't know what a jitney is, too lazy to Google it, but lup is to transport, so lupwI' is a transporter, something one can drive, or get a ride on/in. I suppose it is the Klingon version of a taxi or a bus or maybe it is even meant to be more general: something with wheels?

I would avoid transliterating anything but proper Terran names and then only if the events take place on this planet.

QoghtlhIH'u'

[kreide2000]

Lots of great info so far!

Anyway, I've got another question to submit humbly.  Is there a way to show who causes the action in a passive sentence in Klingon?
Something like this, for example:

jaghmo' HoHlu' yaS
The officer was killed by the enemy.

Or does this have to be interpreted as: Because of the enemy someone killed the officer.  It seems pretty close to me meaning-wise, but not exact.

I've been working on translating some more Klingon as well.  As always all comments and suggestions are welcome.

yIlegh.  mughongpu’ ‘ej muqIppu’.
mupunmoHpu’ ‘ej muHejpu’.
reH DuQubtaHchugh, muSmeH bIyIntaH.

yIlegh.  mughongpu’ ‘ej muqIppu’.
mupunmoHpu’ ‘ej muHejpu’.
reH DuQubtaHbe’chugh, bangmeH bIyIntaH.

Look how he abused me and beat me.
How he threw me down and robbed me.
If you live with such thoughts, you live in hate.

Look how he abused me and beat me.
How he threw me down and robbed me.
If you abandon such thoughts, you live in love.

not qo’vamDaq muSghach Qaw’ muSghach.
muSghach Qaw’ bangghach neH.
tIQ chutvam.
Dor yInmeymaj ‘e’ yajbe’ Hoch
‘ach DaSovchugh
mev SolmeylIj.

In this world hate never dispels hate.
Only love dispels hate.
This law is ancient.
Not everyone understands that our lives come to an end,
But if you understand it,
Your quarrels will end.

[QoghtlhIH'u']

jaghmo' HoHlu' yaS
The officer was killed by the enemy.

A passive sentence in Klingon is indeed approximated with the lu' suffix. However, using the lu' suffix means that the subject is someone or something otherwise undefined. So the verb plus lu' does not have a subject or rather that the suffix is saying that there is no defined subject.
So to say that:
 A was verbed by B
 as such is in my humble opinion not possible in Klingon.
yaS HoH jagh  the enemy kills/killed/will kill the officer
or
yaS HoHlu'
the officer was killed/is killed/will be killed  or: Someone killed the officer.

jaghmo' yaS HoHlu'  ->  yaS before HoHlu' !!!
Because of the enemy the officer was killed (maybe because the enemy distracted the officer and the officer accidentally disrupted him/herself or stepped on a mine)

yIlegh.  mughongpu’ ‘ej muqIppu’.Look how he abused me and beat me.

mughongpu’ ‘ej muqIppu’ 'e' yIlegh. 
The abusing and beating is the object of "(you) Look"

mupunmoHpu’ ‘ej muHejpu’.
I think you meant to say:
mupummoHpu' ......
He caused me to fall  ......

There is more to comment on but you are on the right track....

tlhIngan Hol is not English or Italian. ......
bIjatlhchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj qoj bIvangchugh watlhHa'taHvIS yablIj vaj Dutlha' 'oy'  'e'  tepqengwI’ tlha'moHbogh *ox*  tlha'bogh rutlh rur
If you speak while your mind is impure or if you act while your mind is impure then pain will follow you, that resembles a wheel that follows an ox that draws the cart.

Actually, Klingon rutlh is Italian ruota
So I take that back. 



[Edit -- combined multiple posts -=- Kesvirit]

[kreide2000]

Funny, I've been seeing rut when I look at rutlh.  Or how about German?  Rad.

kreide

[Qunchuy]

Is there a way to show who causes the action in a passive sentence in Klingon?

There are no passive sentences in Klingon. The indefinite subject is often translated using English passive voice, but they are not the same thing. Using the verb suffix -lu' to indicate an indefinite subject is incompatible with identifying a definite subject.

I've been working on translating some more Klingon as well.  As always all comments and suggestions are welcome.

My strongest comment would be for you to turn off whatever it is that's mangling your apostrophes. They're turning into odd characters that I think are meant to be angled quotes that point one way at the beginning of a word and the other way elsewhere. Are you perhaps composing your Klingon using a word processor and pasting it into the forum posts?

reH DuQubtaHchugh, muSmeH bIyIntaH.
If you live with such thoughts, you live in hate.

The verb prefix Du- indicates that someone or something acts on you. I think you wanted Da-, meaning that you act on someone or something. But I don't think it works for if you live with such thoughts. Consider instead DuSIgh qechmeyvam 'e' Dachaw'chugh if you permit these ideas to influence you.

You also need the proper prefix on the penultimate word: bImuSmeH bIyIntaH. Klingon lacks the equivalent of the English infinitive, so you can't just say "you live to hate." You need to say "you live in order that you hate." I'm not sure that's really what you want to say, though.

reH DuQubtaHbeÍchugh, bangmeH bIyIntaH.
If you abandon such thoughts, you live in love.

bang is a noun meaning loved one. There is no simple Klingon translation for the English verb "love". I'm not going to try to fix this one, as it would end up with the meaning changed too much.

...muSghach...bangghach...

-ghach on a verb with no other suffixes is weird. Don't do it unless you really want to invite frowns at the unusual grammatical usage. For hate, try QeH anger or even QeH'a'.

Again, bang loved one is not a verb. I think the simplest way to get around the vocabulary problem here is to alter the sentiment to speak of war vs. peace instead of hate vs. love.

[kreide2000]

Very cool.  I'm going to take the weekend to sort through all the stuff I've already translated and see how I can improve it with all of the new information and suggestions.

kreide



[Edit -- This thread has been split and continues here. -=- Kesvirit

[kreide2000]

Well, I've studied up and I'm hoping that this new set of sentences works out a little better.

bIQDep vISuqmeH vIlo’.
To bait fish withal,

pagh vISuqlaHbe’chugh vaj lo’ bortaSwIj.
if it will feed nothing else,it will feed my revenge;

mutIchpu’ ‘ej ghaHmo’ wa’ ‘uy’ <Duqat> vIchIlpu’.
he hath disgraced me and hindered me half a million,

HuchwIj tlhaplu’pu’DI’ Hagh ghaH.
laughed at my losses,

Huch vISuqDI’ muvaqpu’.
mocked at my gains,

nughwIj nuSpu’. (nughwI' ?)
scorned my nation,

jItlhongDI’ muSorghpu’.
thwarted my bargains

ghaHmo’ Hop juppu’wI’.
cooled my friends,

ghaHmo’ law’ jaghpu’wI’
heated mine enemies-

'ej nuq ‘oH meq’e’.
and what’s the reason?

Looking forward to your comments.
kreide

[ter'eS]

At first glance, this looks pretty good. You have done a good job casting the ideas in Klingon terms and not trying to reproduce the English sentence structure. Everything looks grammatical.  I have only 3 comments:

1. I don't think you need all the -pu's; it's not a past tense marker, but a completed action marker.  While this sometimes seems equivalent to English past tense, realize that you can use -pu' in a present or future context, too (eg. DaH HoD vIHoHpu' "I've already killed the Captain."; wa'leS HoD vIHoHpu' "(By) tomorrow I will have killed the Captain".)  It points up action completed before the time of some other action and implies something other than simply action already finished.  I use -pu' and -ta' only when it's important to emphasize the "already completed" idea.

2. Is something missing from the first sentence? "In order to catch fish, I use (?); if I can acquire nothing, then my revenge will use (?)".

3. pagh doesn't really mean "nothing else", just "nothing".  I can't think of a simple way to say "nothing else".  Maybe Dochvetlh neH "This thing only".

[Qunchuy]

1. I don't think you need all the -pu's; it's not a past tense marker, but a completed action marker.

I, on the other hand, thought the use of -pu' in the piece was perfectly done. Note the English phrasing: "...he hath disgraced me...." The match between Klingon and English perfective ideas is exactly right.

However, the final phrase, 'ej nuq 'oH meq'e', makes me frown. The nouns seem in the wrong order, for one thing. Mostly, I'd find it much nicer if it used a true verb rather than a pronoun-as-to-be. My suggestion would be something like 'ej qatlh ruchta' and why has he done it?

[kreide2000]

Thanks for the comments!

I think the confusion over vIlo' came about from taking the speech out of context.  This is one of Shylock's speeches from the Merchant of Venice and the mysterious "it" is the pound of flesh he wants to carve off of his enemy's chest.

Seeing the -ta' suffix on 'ej qatlh ruchta' got me thinking that maybe that would have been the proper suffix instead of -pu', since Shylock's enemy deliberately made it a point to hound him on each of the occasions he cites.

kreide2000

[ter'eS]

We'll have to agree to disagree, then, because I still think the "completed" suffix is unnecessary here.  In general, I think we English-speakers don't have a real firm grasp of the distinction between completed action and past tense, because our language doesn't make the distinction.  I'd love to see what a native Arabic speaker would do in such cases.

On the other hand, I think kreide2000 is right, and it should be -ta', if you're going to use it at all.