|
In any
language translation, there will always be some amount of
ambiguousness as to what the original author was trying to convey.
The translation can be influenced by the translator's opinions, by
cultural differences, simple mistakes in translation or lack of
knowledge about any of the aforementioned items. The Klingon
language (or thlInghanHol) is the language of warriors. The
pleasantries of English are avoided by Klingons; they prefer to jump
straight to the point of whatever their discussion is about. When
engaging Klingons, one does not want to make the mistake of asking
how they are doing. To do so might result in hand-to-hand combat.
If one forgoes engaging Klingons in their verbal discourse and
instead reads the literature, one stands much less of a chance of
being attacked. Reading their literature, however, poses another
problem that would also be encountered in dialogue: many of their
terminologies and language structures are diametrically opposed to
the English language system. In this paper, I will attempt to
perform translations of Klingon into English (from the Klingon
Hamlet) and then compare the translation with the 'original' English.
Then, I will explore the differences that occur and whether these
differences result in a fundamental change in meaning, or if the
original writers of Khamlet took great care to preserve the integrity
of Shakespeare's work.
To accomplish this task, I think the method of translation is what
should be under question. My primary source for translating should
be The Klingon Dictionary to
keep my translation as consistent as possible. The dictionary, while
including direct translation of words from English to Klingon and
back again, also includes grammatical rules. Unless otherwise
noted, all translation rules and word translations will come from the
Klingon Dictionary. The dictionary, however, is incomplete in some
instances, and I may need to draw on on-line dictionaries to look up
meanings of individual words. qo' is
not found in the dictionary, but it stands for 'world'. One would
assume that qo' is
an archaic term, since the dictionary has a translation for the word
'planet' (yuQ). Great
care will be taken care to interpret the grammar and syntax
correctly.
To
do this, a three-fold translation system should take place. First, I
will present the original Klingon sentence in bold
type-face. Then, I will
reproduce the sentence as a direct translation ignoring rules of
syntax. Then, I will produce a third sentence that is the 'Final'
and correct translation. This third version would be how I would
interpret the original Klingon into English. A final sentence will
then be added that is Shakespeare's version. Accompanying the
translation, will be translation notes regarding how I interpret
certain rules of syntax. A glossary of terms used will be present at
the end of the paper as a reference to look up the individual words.
For example, the English system follows the Subject-Verb-Object
pattern in upwards of 90% of all standard sentences. Klingon,
however, follows the Object-Verb-Subject pattern. A sentence
translated from Klingon into English might read “The cow ate the
human,” a vastly different sentence from what was intended in the
original Klingon: “The human ate the cow.” Another difference is
the lack of adjectives in Klingon. In Klingon, to refer to someone
as 'strong', the infinitive phrase 'to be strong' is incorporated
into the sentence. “Big ships” would first be read literally in
Klingonese as “ships be big.” If a translator translated
sentences in this manner, Klingons might be perceived as simpletons,
who use language in a child-like manner.
Another fascinating aspect of Klingon is in its use of pronominal
prefixes attached to verbs. This prefix tells who or what is
performing the action and who/what is receiving the action (the
subject and the object). For example, a direct translation of
“qalegh” from Klingon to English might read “I-you see”,
where 'I' is the subject and 'you' is the object. A mistranslation
might, “It is I that you see.” The real translation is “I see
you.” A different prefix, however, would be used to express
“I-Them see,” “vIlegh”. 'vI-' actually
represents the objects “him/her,” “it” and “them.” The
only way to tell is by context. These prefixes are used when using
pronouns, but also when using subject and object markers.
yuQ lulegh yaSpu'
Planet, they-it see the
officers.
“The officers see the planet.”
The first sentence is how it appears in Klingon. The second option
is a direct translation and represents a wrong interpretation. The
third sentence is the right translation of the Klingon into English.
These simple sentences can be translated with little difficulty if
enough knowledge of the language exists, but there are much more
complex sentences out there.
taH pagh taHbe'
To continue or to continue not.
“To be or not to be”
Look at the above line from Khamlet. In Klingon there is no verb to
express the phrase “to be”. taH is best translated as “to
continue” (taH=to continue; pagh=or, be'=suffix
expressing the negative). Some might say a direct translation might
lose meaning. “Continue” without context could be interpreted as
“Continuing to perform some action”, “Continuing along a set
path” or the proper translation “To continue existence; to be”.
Deciding on how to interpret this sentence would be a crucial part
of the translation for Hamlet; if translated incorrectly, a very
powerful monologue might be misintrepeted. Another problem that a
translator might run into is words that have multiple meanings. pagh
in the above sentence is correctly interpreted as 'or'; however,
other meanings are available. pagh could mean 'nothing, none'
or the number 'zero'. Without a context, the above phrase could be
interpreted as “To continue nothing; not to continue.” The
meaning would change from a question to a statement. It becomes a
play on words, rather than the in-depth philosophizing of life. This
is a vastly different meaning than the correct translation. A
comprehensive knowledge of conjunctions and verb construction is
required; otherwise, a simple one-to-one word translation might yield
the wrong result.
toH,
chovnatlh Doj ghaH tlhInghan'e'
So, specimen impressive “he/she”
Klingon is
“So, (only) a Klingon is an
impressive specimen.”
“What a piece of work is man”
In this translation, our subject tlhInghan (Klingon) is
modified by 'e', which gives an understood value to the word
Klingon of singularity. “A Klingon, and only a Klingon” would be
a cumbersome way of interpreting tlhInghan'e'. 'e' gives
the reader the clue that only a Klingon is being spoken about.
Humans, animals, and other species are excluded because only a
Klingon is an impressive specimen.
valqu'
meqlaHDaj
To be fiercely clever, one
reason ability is interesting
“One interesting
reason-ability is CLEVERNESS
“How noble in reason!”
In this translation, qu' is an emphatic describing an elevated
state of whatever it modifies. So in this instance, cleverness is
augmented by qu' though it isn't necessarily translated into
words. I use capitalization to distinguish between 'cleverness' and
'fierce CLEVERNESS'. This sentence also presents the first compound
noun that we've seen. meqlaH is a combination of words
directly meaning 'reason-ability'. It could be re-interpreted into
English as 'mind-power' or 'thought-ability' but to preserve the
continuity into English, 'reason-ability' is the most effective
translation.
HoSqu'
porghlaHDaj
To be strong-body ability is
interesting
“One interesting body ability
is STRENGTH”
“How infinite in faculty”
Again, we have a compound noun, 'body-ability' which has been
similarly interpreted as the above example. The emphatic has also
been interpreted as a capitalization of 'strength'. From the last
two translations, what we begin to notice is that Klingon is an
extremely literal language, whereas Shakespeare wrote more
expressively. “How infinite in faculty” is more poetic than “An
interesting body-ability is STRENGTH”. Since we know we're only
talking about Klingons from the very first sentence, a translator
might decide to put the last two sentences into context. A
translator might simplify things in the following manner:
“Klingons are extremely clever
Klingons have superior
strength.”
If we translate in this manner, though, we lose some of
the poeticism that is present in the Klingon version. To translate
Klingon (especially the more poetic examples) a translator faces a
conflict between preserving the integrity of the words present in the
original, or preserving the most meaning for the audience (in this
case, English speakers in a language class).
chentaHVIs
'ej vIHtaHvIS po' 'ej le'
“While
continuously taking form and while continuously moving; to be expert
to be special.”
“While
taking form and moving; one is expert and special.”
“In
form and moving, how express and admirable.”
chen is a verb
meaning “to take form”. What follows are two suffixes
-taH and -vIS. -taH
is a type-7 suffix, which
denotes aspect. Klingon language doesn't have verb modifications to
indicate past, present and future tenses. It is expected that other
contexts will clue the reader in to what stage a verb is at. -taH
which translates as
'continuous', meaning that an action is ongoing. -vIS, a
type-9 suffix, is always used in conjunction with -taH. It
means 'while.' Normally, a verb would be accompanied by a noun.
Since this entire monologue refers to the Klingon specimen from the
first phrase, a translation preserving the idea presented might be:
“While a Klingon is taking form and moving, he is expert and
special.”
Dol'a'
jub rur SuvtaHvIS
Entity of higher propotions that
is immortal resembles continuous fighting
“While a Klingon is fighting
resembles an immortal superior entity.”
“In
action, how like an angel.”
Remembering
the Object-Verb-Subject pattern, and referring to the Klingon
specimen that is the antecedent of the entire monologue, we reach an
interpretation of SuvtaHvIS that
is “While a Klingon is fighting.” Without a context, a translator
might accidentally translate into the first example if he didn't
remember the structure order. I will discuss the immortal beings
with this next translation.
QI'tu'
moch rur QubtaHvIS
Superior or Paradise resembles
thinking
“While thinking, a Klingon
resemembles the Superior of Paradise.”
“In apprehension, how like a
god!”
Klingon religion no longer has gods, as discussed in the epidsodes
“Homefront” and “You are Cordially Invited...” (DS9:
Seasons 4 & 6, respectively). Klingons found them to be
meddlesome and untrustworthy, and so they killed the gods that
created them. This event is described during the Klingon wedding
ceremony. As such, there is no mention in any of the canon of any
version of angels. When the Klingon afterlife is referenced in the
television shows, the only ones mentioned are Klingons. There is a
dishonored Klingon (Kortar) that ferries the “Barge of the Dead”
that carries other dishonored Klingons to the Underworld (ghe''or;
or Grethor). There is also a type of mythical beast (veqlargh;
Fek'lhr) that guards the gates to Grethor; however, this beast is
akin to a proto-Klingon and doesn't serve the function of 'devil' in
human mythology. A mistake of a translator may be to translate
“Superior of Paradise” as 'God' when that doesn't exist in
Klingon mythology. QI'tu' is translated as Paradise (Star
Trek V: The Final Frontier), but it has the roots QI', meaning
'military' and tu' meaning 'to observe.' Without knowing that
QI'tu' is an idiomatic expression meaning 'Paradise' a
translator might be tempted to interpret the phrase as “To observe
the military”. It is unknown how Klingons interpret Paradise,
though since they are a warlike culture, it would make sense that
Paradise for a Klingon would be a military observing ground.
'IHchu'bogh
qo''a'Daq pupchu' mutvam 'IH
To be beautiful clearly which
World perfect clearly species this to be beautiful
“What is clearly beautiful in
the World is this Perfectly Beautiful Species”
“The Beauty of the World! The
Paragon of animals”
This was an extremely complicated translation. The word qo''a'Daq
is interpreted by the one word, 'World', though the explanation
is more complex than that. Daq is a locative marker
indicating that some action is being performed in the vicinity of the
word it is attached to. It can have multiple meanings of 'to', 'in',
'at' and 'on'. This sentence could have been interpreted “on this
world” or “at this world”. Context plays an important role in
this translation. The suffix 'a' is an augmentative. Instead
of this being a world, we are referring to a world above the others;
a world with some superior attribute. Since Klingons all come from a
single planet (at least, originally), it stands to reason that the
World is Qo'noS, the Klingon homeworld. It is superior above
all others.
'a
jIHvaD ramlaw' chenmeH porghmeyvam lam'e' tlholHa'moHbogh 'u'
However, I, for trivial
apparently to take form for bodies this dirt be unprocessed undoes
causes which universe.
“However,
for I, the universe that causes unprocessed dirt to form appears to
be trivial.”
“And
yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust?”
Besides
being a longer translation, this example is actually fairly
straightforward. The direct translation ignores the rules of syntax,
but after rearranging the sentence into the English form
Subject-Verb-Object, the sentence appears to have meaning.
“Unprocessed dirt” could be interpreted as 'dust' in the final
translation, though I prefer to keep as few degrees of separation
between the direct translation and the final product.
mubelmoHbe'
loD—be''e'je, 'ach SuHaghmo' jaS SuQublaw'
They pleasure me cause not
man—woman also; but, you laugh due to differently you think
apparently.
“Men
cause me no pleasure—females, as well; however, due to your
laughter, you appear to think differently.”
“Man
delights not me; no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you
seem to say so.”
This
sentence could be interpreted (if it were left in the first
translation) as men and women do
cause me pleasure, but you laugh because you think differently.
Again, great care must be taken to
preserve the perpetrator of an action and who the action is performed
on.
I
chose this passage from Hamlet because I knew the idea being conveyed
(which because I don't actually speak Klingon, I couldn't discern
from simply reading it in the original Klingon) without knowing the
direct English translation. Therefore, I could translate the Klingon
into English, preserving the meaning, but not worrying about
foreknowledge of how the sentence should turn out. This resulted,
quite nicely, in an English translation of the Klingon that was
different from the original English. The translation provided a way
of comparing the two languages systems between Klingon and English,
while also allowing an observation on the difficulties with
translating from one language to another. A translator must be
constantly on the alert for idiomatic expressions and cultural
references. The phrase ghIchwIj DabochmoHchugh
ghIchlIj qanob is literally
translated as “If you shine my nose, I will give you your nose.”
The meaning to be conveyed, however, is “Don't try to fool me!”
The implication in the Klingon version is “If you get away with
fooling me, you will get your comeuppance.” Another idiomatic
translation is Hab SoSlI' Quch! or
“Your mother has a smooth forehead.” Without a context on
Klingon culture, this phrase has no real meaning in English. If I
were to translate this into the idea that is trying to be conveyed,
it would be something to the effect of “Your momma (insert
comparison).” In Klingon, the forehead ridges are a sign of a
family's lineage and is of great importance, much like the tartan is
the sign of your family in Scotland. A Scottish insult that runs
into similar lines may be, “Your mother wears the tartan of (your
enemy clan).” In this instance, does a translator preserve the
one-to-one meaning or the intent of the phrase (an insult). These
are the complex decisions that are faced by a translator.
Qapla'
I realize I posted a similar entry a few weeks ago, but I thought you might want to read the final paper. Which I'm turning in tomorrow. Yay. I'll let you know how it goes.
| 
