[2599] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: The Heart Sutra
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Tue Jan 18 03:12:08 1994
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: nsn@vis.mu.OZ.AU (Nick NICHOLAS)
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 94 19:07:00 EDT
In-Reply-To: <29280.9401162130@zen.sys.uea.ac.uk>; from "jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk" at
Jan 16, 94 9:30 pm
batlh choja', jrk@sys.uea.ac.uk quv:
=botlh ghItlh
Middle manuscript, or Writing the middle. I don't get it, but suspect you
meant ghItlh botlh
=bang 'oHbogh valchu'qu'taHghach pequvmoH 'ej pevan.
If you mean the wisdom that is love, not the lover, then muSHa'ghach
'oHbogh valchu'qu'taHghach'e'. Also yIquvmoH 'ej yIvan, since these
imperatives do have an object.
=Hoch juSta'bogh valchu'qu'taHghach HeDaq Hop lengtaHneS *'avaloQIta'*.
Avalokrita travels the long road of wisdom surpassing everything? If so,
that should be He HopDaq; the suffixes follow the adjectival verb.
=Daqvo' jen nejtaH ghaH.
Again: Daq jenvo'
=vagh DImey [1] neH leghbej ghaH 'ej chImtaHqu' bIH 'e' leghchu'ta' ghaH.
You do mean DI = litter here, yes?
=chentaHghach pImHa' chImtaHghach 'ej chImtaHghach pImHa' chentaHghach.
Do you mean "no different than"? If so, I'd have preferred nIb. We also
don't know whether we should say pIm A, B --- or B pIm A. I think the
latter is more useful.
=chentaHghach 'oHDI' vay'e', chImtaHghach 'oH. chImtaHghach 'oHDI' vay'e',
=chentaHghach 'oH.
I don't know about 'oH here. As soon as something is shape, it is desolation?
In Lojban, we'd say ckaji, and here too, I think it'd make more sense with
ghaj, chentaHghach being a property, to my mind, rather than a kind of
entity. But this is, of course, subjective.
=teH 'oH chentaHghachDaq 'ej HottaHghachDaq 'ej tu'taHghachDaq 'ej DujDaq
='ej buStaHghachDaq.
I'm confused. If this means: "truth is the place of form and the place of
touch" etc, this should be teH 'oH chentaHghachDaq'e' HottaHghach'e' je...
If: "This is true in [according to] form and touch and...", this should be:
teH ghu'vam, chentaHghach HottaHghach je... qellu'Di'
=naDev, *SarIputra'*, HochDaQ ghItlh chImtaHghach. narghbe' bIH. mevbe'
=bIH. quvHa'be' bIH. quvbe' bIH. naQHa'be' bIH. naQbe' bIH.
nuq bIH? Hoch, I presume? Anaphorisation in Klingon always makes me uneasy,
but I suppose this makes sense.
=ngab chentaHghachmey, ngab chuSmey, ngab pIwmey, ngab yuchmey, ngab
=HotmoHghachmey, ngab yabDochmey. [3]
"Taste" translated as chocolate? Oy vay! I'd prefer something compound
like jattu'laHghach. HotmoHghach are presumably touch stimuli; why the
-moH? Wouldn't HotlaHghach be sufficient? (noting the problem of passivisation
but cf. lo'laH; possibly Hotlu'taHghach)
=taHbe' jIvtaHghach. mevbe' jIvtaHghach. maHcha' mIrmeyDaq teH taHbe'ghach
='ej mevbe'ghach. [5] vaj taHbe' ragh 'ej Hegh. mevbe' ragh 'ej Hegh.
maHcha' should be wa'maHcha'. ragh is a verb, so raghtaHghach; for symmetry,
I can't see how HeghtaHghach would hurt.
=ngab bech, ngab tagh, ngab mev, ngab He. [6]
bechtaHghach, taghpu'ghach, mevtaHghach
=ngab Qub, ngab Qapla', ngab luj.
QubtaHghach, lujpu'ghach
=vaj, *SarIputra'*, Qapla'Daj Qorghbej 'ej valchu'qu'taHghachDaq wuv. 'e'mo'
=QubHa' 'ej <fear>Ha' 'ej QIHmoHghachbogh Hoch chargh *boDISatva'*. vaj
=*nIrvana'* SIch.
He cares for his success and depends on his wisdom. Who is "he"? 'e'mo'
is notoriously illegal; use ghu'vammo' instead. bodisatva conquers all
damaging? If so, what is -bogh doing at the end of a noun?
=Narghbogh wej poHmeyDaq Hoch *bu'Da'*pu' valchu'qu'taHghachDaq Qam chaH.
=vaj yab naQ lugh pup wov chavchu'
All Buddhas, inside three times that have appeared --- where is the verb?
Hoch should probably follow poHmey; that's the consensus that has been
reached. Also, spatial prepositions aren't used with time (see the "40
throats in one night" in the TKD cheat sheet); this should be "qaStaHvIS
narghbogh wej poHmey Hoch", or, if wej means "not yet" rather than "three",
qaStaHvIS wej narghbogh poHmey Hoch". I take it that's "so they perfectly
achieve the perfect light of the entire correct brain"? If so, with
adjectives following nouns, that should be vaj yab naQ lugh wov pup
=vaj valchu'qu'taHghach yIyaj. ghItlhta'ghach Dun 'oH. SovtaHghach Dun
=ghaj 'oH. 'oH QaQ law', Hoch QaQ puS. QIv ghItlh pIm. bechtaHghach Qaw'
='oH. luj chay'
It is a wondrous writing? Then 'oH ghItlhta'ghach Dun'e' (or just 'oH
ghItlh Dun'e'). pIm shouldn't really be used for other; that's what
latlh is for: QIv ghItlh latlh Hoch. Is the last sentence a rhetorical
question? In my estimation (and you'll have seen this in Lojban), rhetorical
questions are not to be relied on in alien languages.
=naQ valchu'qu'taHghach.
Should naQ here be pItlh?
=[1] vagh DImey bIH chentaHghach'e' 'ej HottaHghach'e' 'ej tu'taHghach'e'
='ej Duj'e' 'ej buStaHghach'e'. Hoch ngaS vagh DImey.
Form, touch, discovery, instinct, and... concern? concentration?
=[2] porgh nochmey buv mInvam 'ej vagh latlhvetlh. jav noch ponglu'.
'ej only between sentences: buv mInvam, vagh latlhvetlh je
=[3] jav noch vangtaHghach bIH chentaHghachmey 'ej vagh latlh.
chentaHghachmey, vagh latlh je
=[5] maHcha' mIrmey 'oH ghItlhvam maHcha' mIrmey ponglu'. jIvtaHghach 'oH
=mIr wa'DIch. San chenmoHghach 'oH mIr cha'DIch. QubtaHghach 'oH mIr
=wejDIch. pong 'ej chentaHghach 'oH mIr loSDIch. jav noch 'oH mIr
=vaghDIch. HottaHghach 'oH mIr javDIch. SaHtaHghach 'oH mIr SochDIch.
=neHtaHghach 'oH mIr chorghDIch. HumtaHghach 'oH mIr HutDIch. mojtaHghach
='oH mIr wa'maHDIch. boghta'ghach 'oH mIr wa'maH wa'DIch. raghtaHghach 'ej
=HeghtaHghach 'oH mIr wejDIch. mIr chenmoH mIr. yIn ghoDaq lengtaHghach
=mevHa'taH yoq 'ej Dep QIv.
wa'maHcha'. The twelve chains are the manuscrpit's 12 chains one calls them.
Que? If "the manuscrpit calls <something> the twelve chains", then
something like DochvamvaD "wa'maHcha' mIrmey ponglu', ghItlhvam lo'taHvIS".
Don't forget the -'e' after all subjects of 'oH. San chenmoHghach ---
would this be reincarnation? HumtaHghach --- stickiness? What does this
mean? Also don't forget its N N je, not N 'ej N. lengtaHghach mevHa'taH
could be translated as just lenglI'
=[6] loS teHtaHghach'e' batlh 'oH ghItlhvam bechmoH Hoch 'e' 'oH
=teHtaHghach batlh wa'DIch. neHtaHghachmo' bechmoH Hoch 'e' 'oH
=teHtaHghach batlh cha'DIch. mev bechtaHghach 'e'mo' mev neHtaHghach 'e'
='oH teHtaHghach batlh wejDIch. mev bechtaHghach net chavlaH 'e' 'oH
=teHtaHghach batlh loSDIch.
You've completely lost me here, I suspect because you're trying to use 'e'
for sentences as subjects. I'll attempt to reconstruct this:
loS vIt quv qel ghItlhvam. (the manuscript considers the four honoured
truths. batlh is a noun, not a verb or adjective.)
bechmoH Hoch. vIt quv wa'DIch 'oH ghu'vam'e'.
neHtaHghachmo' bechmoH Hoch. vIt quv cha'DIch 'oH ghu'vam'e'.
mevmo' bechtaHghach mev neHtaHghach. (or:) mevDI' bechtaHghach, mev
neHtaHghach. (or:) mevchugh bechtaHghach, vaj mev neHtaHghach.
vIt quv wejDIch 'oH ghu'vam'e'.
mev bechtaHghach net chavlaH. vIt quv loSDIch 'oH ghu'vam'e'.
== == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == == ==
Nick Nicholas, Breather {le'o ko na rivbi fi'inai palci je tolvri danlu}
nsn@krang.vis.mu.oz.au -- Miguel Cervantes tr. Jorge LLambias
