[184] in tlhIngan-Hol
response to ~mark
dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (dcctdw@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Sun Feb 16 19:19:26 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: krankor@IMA.ISC.COM (Captain Krankor)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Sun, 2 Feb 92 14:02:35 -0500
I, and I think many others here, are also dissatisfied with the "to be
or not to be" translation -- again, we take it with something of a
grain of salt, since Okrand himself did it under duress. Yes, as I have
said before, the main problem isn't the 'to be', it's the lack of an
infinitive. However, I disagree with you entirely on the use of pagh fo
the 'or'. I don't think there's anything innate in the English that makes
it a question -- the question-ness comes principly from the next line:
"That is the question." I don't think pagh loses anything from the English
'or'. Also, you said something about that taH must be being used as a noun
form because of pagh-- check again, pagh joins sentences, ghap joins nouns.
My personal choice for translation is this one:
ghaHtaHghach ghaHbe'taHghach ghap
--Krankor
