[88234] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: gha'tlhIq
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI' 'utlh)
Thu Sep 2 11:56:05 2010
In-Reply-To: <201008312230.48094.j.silver@mupwi.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:41:25 -0400
From: "ghunchu'wI' 'utlh" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
ja'pu' mupwI':
> Were there any glaring grammatical blunders?
I'm tempted to say that trying to translate something like this in the
first place is a major blunder itself. :-P While prose can survive
translation without obvious damage, poetry usually requires much more
work. Often the best "translations" have words and grammar which are
very different from the original.
ja' QeS 'utlh:
> Qoy, *'aSghotlh puqloD.
> Qoy, puqbe'pu'.
> charbogh SuDbogh je tlherwI'
> wa' 'I'wIjDaq vItu'.
jIHaghqu'! That's more like it!
Distill the thing until the words are gone and only the essense
remains, then pick an appropriately-shaped container and add new words
and grammar to reconstitute it in the target language.
'I'wIjDaq charbogh SuDbogh je tlherwI' vItu'bogh vanmeH gha'tlhIq
(if you like the {Xbogh Ybogh je}, that is).
-- ghunchu'wI'
