Re: par' vs. muS?

[Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>]

Voragh:
> >FYI: Among Klingonists, a common way to say this is {bangwI' SoH} "you are
> >my love (loved one)", {bangwI' ghaH} s/he is my love", etc. - which avoids
> >the problem of which verb to use.

Shane MiQogh:
>Even though klingons don't say "i love you" this would be something used 
>in idle chitchat since it could be interpreted in many ways which in 
>almost all cases wouldn't be defined by context. It could mean "your are 
>my beloved friend" or it could mean a few other things included what we 
>traditionally suggest it means.

We're not entirely sure what {bang} "love, one who is loved, beloved one" 
covers though, as I mentioned before, it probably is inappropriate WRT 
one's children.  Here is what Okrand has written on the matter:

   ... the word {bang} is indeed a noun meaning "love", but it refers
   to the object of one's affection, that is, "beloved one". (In Star
   Trek III, Kruge refers to Valkris as {bangwI'} "my love" in this
   sense.) (msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand 12/12/96)

   Presumably the blood's song concerns the beloved individual." (TKW 17)

   The {bang bom}, or love song (though a more literal, and perhaps
   telling, translation is "beloved's song") plays an important role
   in Klingon courting behavior, though exactly how it fits in depends
   on the particular tradition being followed, and this depends, for
   the most part, on the region in which one or the other of the
   participants in the courtship ritual grew up. (KGT 78)

   ... couples (officially married and otherwise) tend to call each
   other by pet names (sometimes called endearments or hypocorisms or,
   in Klingon, {bang pongmey} ["beloveds' names"]). A {bang pong} is
   usually couple-specific - that is, the set of expressions used by
   one couple is different from that used by another couple. Pet names
   are almost never uttered unless the two members of the couple are
   alone and, therefore, are seldom known by anyone else. Indeed, one
   of the defining characteristics of a {bang pong} is that it be
   secret, known only by the two members of the couple.  (KGT 199)

   Qapla' jawwI' bangwI' je
   Success my lord and my love. ST3 (Valkris to Kruge)

   reH bang larghlu'
   Love is always smelled.
   ("A loved one is always smelled"). TKW

   HIchop, bang
   Give us a kiss, love. RT

There is another word, {parmaqqay} "romantic companion, romantic partner 
(*par'Machkai*)":

   A similar pattern is observed for {parmaqqay}, which means "someone
   involved in a romantic relationship with a specific other person"
   ("romantic partner", perhaps). The word {parmaqqay} is formed from
   {parmaq}, conventionally translated "love" or "romance" (though the
   Klingon concept is far more aggressive than the Federation Standard
   translations imply), plus {qay}, an otherwise unknown element. One
   may refer to one's "romantic partner" as {parmaqqaywI'} ("my
   {parmaqqay}), but one rarely uses the word in direct address (as in,
   say, {parmaqqay HIghoS} ["{parmaqqay}, "come here"]). Instead, couples
   (officially married and otherwise) tend to call each other by pet names
   (sometimes called endearments or hypocorisms or, in Klingon, {bang
   pongmey} ["beloveds' names"]). (KGT 199)

   We do know that there is a Klingon word for "love," meaning something
   like what we mean by the word. It is {parmaq}. We heard this word for
   the first time in a recent episode of Deep Space Nine where Dax says
   that parmaq is "the Klingon word for 'love,' but with more aggressive
   overtones." She accuses Worf of having a "bad case" of {parmaq}, which
   suggests it's a noun. ... Unfortunately, so far, that's about all we
   know about the Klingon word for "love." I'll have to do some additional
   research to find out how the word is used correctly in a sentence. Since
   it's Klingon love we're talking about here, I wouldn't be surprised to
   learn that it doesn't work in at all the same way as the Federation
   Standard word "love."    (msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand 12/12/96)

The difference between {bang} and {parmaqqay} is unclear, but {parmaqqay} 
appears to refer to a more overtly sexual or lustful ("aggressive" as 
Okrand and the Paramount writers coyly put it) relationship.

{bang} has certainly been used for adult lovers, but whether it can also be 
used for close, non-romantic friends is again unknown.  (Personally, I 
wouldn't presume to use it this way.)  Klingon does have other words for 
this however:

   The word {jup} ["friend"], however, does not necessarily connote a
   close friend. For this, one may add the noun suffix {-na'} ("definite")
   to the word and say {jupna'} ("real friend, good friend"):  {jupna' 'Iw
   HIQ yItlhutlh} ("Good friend, drink the bloodwine") or {jupna'wI' 'Iw
   HIq yItlhutlh} ("My good friend, drink the bloodwine"). In addition,
   however, there are some other terms used for very close friends, and
   the correct usage depends, among other things, on the gender of the
   speaker and the addressee. (KGT 202)

These gender-based terms are {maqoch} and {chaj}:

   The word {maqoch}, sometimes translated as "buddy" or "pal", is used
   most often by a male addressing another male who is a good friend,
   as in {maqoch 'Iw HIq yItlhutlh} ("Pal, drink the bloodwine"). When
   used in such a context, it signifies genuine companionship. If, however,
   it is used by someone who is definitely not a good friend, such as a
   member of a house with which one has been feuding, it is considered
   offensive. Furthermore, if used by a casual acquaintance, it may be
   taken as a sign of aggression; Klingons are generally apprehensive
   about those showing too much friendship. [...] There is a word that
   Klingon females use in a pattern paralleling the males' use of {maqoch}.
   This word is {chaj}, a close female friend of a female. As with {maqoch},
   it is used only in addressing a true friend. If uttered by a female
   adversary, it is insulting; if uttered by a casual acquaintance it is
   presumptuous. A male Klingon would address a female Klingon as {chaj}
   only to offend her. [...]  (KGT 202-3)

Voragh:
> >Even if Klingons would say this, the indirect object has to precede the OVS
> >string:

Shane MiQogh:
>I'm not saying you're wrong, but where is that in TKD, i can't find that 
>section.

It's in the Addendum of the 1992 edition (TKD 180) "6.8. Indirect objects":

   While the object of the verb is the recipient of the action,
   the indirect object may be considered the beneficiary. In a
   Klingon sentence, the indirect object precedes the object
   and is suffixed with the Type 5 noun suffix {-vaD} "for,
   intended for". The suffix may be attached to either a noun
   or a pronoun.

     yaSvaD taj nobpu' qama'  "The prisoner gave the officer the knife."
     chaHvaD Soj qem yaS      "The officer brings them food."



--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons