The CBB

Oh, hehe. I just updated the thread. I wouldn't presume to update Klingon itself

Thakowsaizmu wrote:Oh, hehe. I just updated the thread. I wouldn't presume to update Klingon itself

Oh! <facepalm> I thought you were saying you'd updated the language itself.
That would have been a major accomplishment IMO. (I'll bet you'd agree!)

But updating this thread is also an accomplishment.

I just watched Hamlet in the original Klingon.

Lines 77-83 of the taH Pagh taHbe' soliloquy (the "to be or not to be" soliloquy)
"Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?"
reminded me of the lines from the Declaration of Independence
"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Has the Declaration of Independence been translated into Klingon?

If not, would somebody care to?

I'd think it'd be about as easy and about as difficult as translating certain Shakespearean works -- sonnets and plays, including Hamlet -- into Klingon. Much easier than translating "Careless Whispers"!

(Note that doesn't mean I'm volunteering to do it!)

Basic Verb Construction and Pronominal Prefixes
Like nouns, verbs in Klingon are highly derived. Also like nouns, Klingon verb suffixes are numbered (though these numbers do not necessarily correspond to the numbers for noun suffixes). The basic pattern is thus:

PRONOMINAL PREFIX-VERB ROOT-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9

Pronominal Prefixes
Pronominal prefixes in Klingon signify the subject and, when relevant, the object of the verb. The first chart shows the pronominal prefixes.

The 0 on the chart indicates no prefix is used. -- signifies that no pronominal prefix exists for this construct, so suffixes and/or pronouns are required.

Imperative Prefixes


Notational Conventions
Pronominal prefixes are translated as subject-object. For example: qa- I-you / 1ps_2ps. In the case of imperatives, a prefix will be noted as: tI- imperative: you-them or IMP_2ps_3pp.

Examples
Qong sleep
yaj understand a situation
legh see
qIp hit
Sop eat in general

jIQong I sleep
bIyaj you understand
legh s/he sees; they see
choqIp you hit me
HIqIp hit me!
vIlegh I see her/him/it/them
yISop eat it!
SuSop you all eat
qayaj I understand you (as in something you said, not as in you as a person)
targhqoqlIj vIlegh I see your so-called targ

http://hol.kag.org/page/grammar

A lot of what you have in this thread is done already. I do think you have expanded a few of the sections though. So, please, keep up the excellent work.

http://www.frathwiki.com/Klingon/lexicon

Relevant.

betleHvam'e' Duqqu'!
bat'leth-PROX.TOP stab-INTENS
These bat'leths are friggin awesome!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3021/313 ... e90e_m.jpg


http://img0.etsystatic.com/018/0/689915 ... 4_i1mi.jpg


http://images.ientrymail.com/techdune/batleth.jpg

http://footballbatsandmore.wordpress.co ... something/

I adapted (read: mutilated) Hangul for Klingon. It works fairly well considering the strict CVC nature of tlhIngan lemma. There are some ambiguities, though.

Cheers.

-chuq is Reciprocal rather than Reflexive, is it not?
Only -`egh is Reflexive, right? (And -`egh is never Reciprocal, right?)

Is there a diminutive like -Hom (sometimes) used to indicate affection or intimacy rather than (always) size or importance or power?
Is -oy ever used to indicate lesser size, lesser importance, or lesser power, rather than endearment?

Is either of them ever used in "humilifics" (the opposite of "honorifics" (which I find only as a verb suffix -neS -- I find no honorific noun suffix).

The "augmentative" noun-suffix -'a' -- is it ever used as an honorific?
Is it ever used the way "augmentatives" are (sometimes) used in (human, Terran) natlangs -- as the opposite of a "term of endearment"?

What about -oy-qoq ?
What about -Hom-qoq or -'a'-qoq ?

-chuq is Reciprocal rather than Reflexive, is it not?
Only -`egh is Reflexive, right? (And -`egh is never Reciprocal, right?)

-'egh is Reflexive, and therefore can take only verbal prefixes which have no object.

jIlegh’egh
1SG.SBJ=see-REFL
I see myself

ma’ang’egh
1PL.SBJ=reveal-REFL
we reveal ourselves

-chuq is Reciprocal. Most examples have only plural verbal prefixes.


Though, I wouldn't understand why a verb like the following wouldn't make some kind of sense, though ungrammatical:

qalegh'egh
1SG.SBJ|2SG.OBJ=see-REFL
I see you looking at me; we see each other(?)

re'ang'egh
1PL.SBJ|2PL.OBJ=reveal-REFL
we reveal you while you reveal us; we and you all reveal ourselves to each other (?)

Is there a diminutive like -Hom (sometimes) used to indicate affection or intimacy rather than (always) size or importance or power?

Pretty much -oy is that suffix.

Is -oy ever used to indicate lesser size, lesser importance, or lesser power, rather than endearment?

As far as I remember, no. That is not how /oy/ works.

Is either of them ever used in "humilifics" (the opposite of "honorifics" (which I find only as a verb suffix -neS -- I find no honorific noun suffix).

tlhInganHol pretty much seems to only have the -neS honorific suffix for verbs.
It raises the level of the person spoken to above oneself, presumably while avoiding too much self-abasement.

IMHO if I remember rightly, TKD might have an example for the use of AUGMENTATIVE 'a' suffix as a kind of honorific:
E.g.

HoD'a' pIqaD "the great (Capt.) Picard"

Is either of them ever used in "humilifics" (the opposite of "honorifics" (which I find only as a verb suffix -neS -- I find no honorific noun suffix).

The current races of Klingons aren't big into being humble. Perhaps such as during the Age of Kingdoms, ending with Molor the Tyrant and the Unification of Kahless, that kind of humility, courtesy, politesse, self-effacement probably existed in the language, of which only vestiges now remain.

But I am only one; what do Masako, Thakow and others say?

taH pagh taHbe'
To be or not to be

masako wrote:http://footballbatsandmore.wordpress.co ... something/
I adapted (read: mutilated) Hangul for Klingon. It works fairly well considering the strict CVC nature of tlhIngan lemma. There are some ambiguities, though.
Cheers.

That's really neat!

eldin raigmore wrote:

masako wrote:http://footballbatsandmore.wordpress.co ... something/
I adapted (read: mutilated) Hangul for Klingon. It works fairly well considering the strict CVC nature of tlhIngan lemma. There are some ambiguities, though.
Cheers.

That's really neat!

Took you a while...but, thanks.

A while ago I tried to translate "Careless Whispers" into Klingon.
Well, I didn't do it myself; I used Bing Translator (Google Translate is no good for this).
Here's what I got:
jIH Hot vaj wej be
Hoch ghoplIj vItlhap
'ej SoH Dev mI' pum
QoQ Hegh je
vay' qaStaHvIS mIn
jatlhpu' jIHDaq boch yab
'ej Hoch 'IQ Qapla'


not jeywIj mI' jatlhqa'
pagh moq Suq DIv qamDu'
pagh ngeD ghet
SoH wej vISov.
vaj jISov puS jupDaj ngor
'ej laSvarghDaq jIH 'e' 'eb qar polHa'
vaj not vIjaH mI' jatlhqa'
mIw mI' jIH

laH not tI' poH
yepHa' tlhup jup
tIq 'ej yab
wej qabuQ vISov
tu'lu' pagh vor neH qaStaHvIS vIt
'oy' Hoch tu' SoH


ramvam QoQ law' vaj HoS jachpu'DI'
'e' ghom'a' laH maluj vIneH
chaq Dunmo' mIw
Hoch latlh 'oy' maH 'oH jatlh wIneH
laH vaj QaQ tay'
mI' laH yIn maH reH
'a DaH 'Iv mI' HItlhej
DubelmoHchugh 'emDaq

DaH 'e' QochQo'chuqlaw'
DaH 'e' QochQo'chuqlaw'
DaH 'e' QochQo'chuqlaw'
nuq jIjatlhpu' vaj QIH
vaj QIH 'e' naDevvo' Daghaj

So; anyone care to correct it?
(If I get Bing Translator to translate it back into English, it comes out mostly nonsense, although often you can tell what the original must have been about.)

masako wrote:http://www.frathwiki.com/Klingon/lexicon

Relevant.

This would be a good source for updating your dictionary:

http://www.kli.org/about-klingon/new-klingon-words/

Khemehekis wrote:

masako wrote:http://www.frathwiki.com/Klingon/lexicon

Relevant.

This would be a good source for updating your dictionary:

http://www.kli.org/about-klingon/new-klingon-words/

Anyone can update that dictionary. It's belongs to the FrathWiki, not me.

masako wrote:
Anyone can update that dictionary. It's belongs to the FrathWiki, not me.

Oh, OK. I hear registration is down lately, though.

Khemehekis wrote:

masako wrote:Anyone can update that dictionary. It's belongs to the FrathWiki, not me.

Oh, OK. I hear registration is down lately, though.

That does not change anything. Anyone can update that page.

masako wrote: That does not change anything. Anyone can update that page.

All I'm seeing at the top is "Page", "Discuss this page", "View source" and "History". When I click on "View source", I get this message at the top:

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:

The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.

You can't be this dense. If you're a user you CAN edit that page. If you're not a user all you need do is register...it's free and takes less than 5 minutes.