The following questions were sent by cha'na to Marc Okrand for the pilot episode of Rebel Ship qajunpaQ / lotlhwI' Duj qajunpaQ, an upcoming bilingual Klingon-English audio drama.

How do Klingons pronounce/write the name Geordi LaForge?

jorDI’ lavo’rIj

Two questions about the phrase Ikalian asteroid belt from the TNG episode The Mind's Eye: first, what is the Klingon name for Ikalia? I've attached a clip of Worf saying "Ikalian asteroid belt", although he appears to say "Ikanian" instead of "Ikalian". And second, how do Klingons refer to an asteroid belt?

The script says the pronunciation is ih-KAY-lee-n. Worf either knows an alternative pronunciation or maybe he just, uh, well…

This is one of those problems that comes up more often than one would like when working on a series: The script says one thing, the actor says another, and a later episode (sometimes a later speaker in the same episode) doesn't match the first speaker. As far as I know, in all of Star Trek, the word is spoken only once (by Worf, in the TNG clip you sent). However, it comes up a few times in Discovery, but in writing only (on star charts). According to Discovery, the star (or star system) is Ikalia. Though it’s not in Discovery, the relevant asteroid belt would be the Ikalian Asteroid Belt.

So, if you want to go by what the writer of the TNG episode intended, the English would be Ikalia / Ikalian (ih-KAY-lee-yuh / ih-KAY-lee-yuhn) and the Klingon would be ’Iqey’lIya’.

If you want to go by the way it was pronounced the only time it was ever pronounced, the English would be Ikania / Ikanian (eye-KAY-nee-yuh / eye-KAY-nee-yuhn) and the Klingon would be ’ayqey’nIya’.

I'd probably go with a compromise. You can hear the spoken version, but you'd have to examine the video to see the written version. Memory Alpha and the Okudas' "Star Trek Encyclopedia" go with the written version. The Encyclopedia gives no pronunciation; Memory Alpha gives the script's pronunciation (and identifies it as such) even though that doesn't match what the actor said (which is not infrequently the case).

So I pick ’ayqey’lIya’ — close to what Worf said and doesn't contradict official stuff.

Not a perfect solution. I'm open to other takes on this!

Note: The final n is there in the English version to make it adjectival. Klingon doesn’t do that — it just uses the noun with no modification.

“Asteroid belt” is ghopDap mIch or ghopDap SIr’o’

As for Ikalia, I think I'll have the rebels call it 'Iqey'lIya' since they're native to the region, and everyone else call it 'ayqey'lIya' due to presumed influence from DIvI' Hol.

Good solution for Ikalia!

How do Klingons refer to actinides, which are a group of radioactive elements in the periodic table? According to The Mind's Eye, the asteroids in the Ikalian asteroid belt have actinides in them, which "provide positive protection against [Klingon] sensors".

The group as a whole is termed va’ghev baSmey, though frequently it’s just va’ghevmey. An individual member of the group may be referred to as a va’ghev baS (or just va’ghev).

Would «ghoptelDaj yI'uch» be a good translation of "lock onto his signal" in the context of using the transporter?

Yes.

What is the Klingon name for Valt Minor, from the TNG episode The Perfect Mate? I've attached a clip of Picard saying it. It's potentially relevant that the Valt system is just outside the Klingon border according to star charts, and Valt Minor has been in a war with the Klingon colony of Krios Prime/QI'yoS wa' for centuries. (There is differing information about whether the Krios from The Mind's Eye is the same as the Krios from The Perfect Mate, but part of the conceit of this audio drama is that they are indeed the same place.)

va’lIt mach. In the TNG episode, the only time the planet is called “Valt Minor” is in Picard’s log entry at the start of the show. Otherwise, they just say “Valt.” I assume “Valt” is just a shortened version of “Valt Minor,” but one of equal status (that is, it’s not an informal variant) because they refer to the Chancellor as “Alrik of Valt,” not “Alrik of Valt Minor.” The Valtese, of course, are va’lItngan(pu’).

How do the verbs Daw' "revolt" and lotlh "rebel" relate grammatically to the institutions being revolted/rebelled against? e.g. would an anti-Klingon Empire rebel say «tlhIngan wo' vIlotlh/vIDaw'»?

Daw’ is generally used in a political sort of context while lotlh is more general.

Grammatically, Daw’ does not take an object while lotlh does (so a better gloss would probably be “rebel, rebel against”). The anti-Klingon rebel would say tlhIngan wo’ yIlotlh! Or this rebel (a slimy lotlhwI’ if there ever was one) could even say tlhIngan wo’ yIlotlh! yIDaw’!

What do Klingons call a mind meld?

chutuQDaq

How does the verb cheH "defect" relate grammatically to the institutions being defected to and away from?

The institution being defected to is followed by -Daq. The institution being defected from is followed by -vo’.

How do Klingons talk about praying to and worshipping religious figures? The context is specifically about Kahless.

For “pray,” when appropriate, you can use words like qoy’ “plead, beg” and tlhob “request, ask, plead,” but there’s a specific word for “pray to” or “entreat” or “implore” or “beseech” a religious (or similar) figure: qIw.

To “worship” as part of a religious belief or rite or service (that is, or to worship a deity or revered figure in that sort of context), the verb is ’am.

To “worship” or “adore” something/someone in a more secular sense (like “I worship the ground you walk on”), the verb is voj.

At qepHom 2023, it was revealed that an object such as a light switch cannot be lugh. Can an action or a reason be lugh? For example, would it be grammatical to say “your cause is just” / «lugh meqraj»?

No. lugh means “right” (as in “true, correct”), but not “morally right, righteous.” lugh meqraj might mean that your cause answered some question correctly.

For “just” (as in “just cause”), perhaps use may “be fair” or mIt “be appropriate, proper.”

And, rather than meq “reason, motive,” would qangtlhIn “principles, ideology” work for your purposes? Or Qu’ “quest, mission” or ngoQ “goal, purpose”?

...I'm a bit confused about lugh. At the qepHom'a' 2023, you said: "...lugh isn't used exclusively when a person has made a correct statement. It is also used when an action can be moral/ proper/ appropriate/ suitable..."

You're right! Sorry. I'd forgotten I'd said that.

So let's amend what I sent to you to say that lugh can be used for "moral" and so on when applied to an action or to a person/group who performs an action, but not normally when applied to a belief or opinion or stance or the like.

According to TKD, verbs with -'egh or -chuq cannot have a prefix that indicates an object. Does the -moH clause override this? e.g. is the phrase «lIghobchuqmoHtaH tlhIngan wo'» grammatically correct?

I’ve seen that construction before, but there are better options.

With -chuq (and -’egh) the subject is also the object (and vice versa), if you want to look at it that way. For current purposes, let’s call that “subject/object.” As we talked about at the qo'Hey qepHom in February, there are prefixes for subject alone and other prefixes for subject-object, but there are no prefixes for such things as “I-us” or “you-you all,” etc. For those sorts of constructions, full pronouns are used (as in maH Qan jIH “I protect us”). Similarly, there are no prefixes for subject-subject/object, so full pronouns are used: tlhIH ghobchuqmoHtaH tlhIngan wo’.

Alternatively, you can make use of the verb raj “instigate, incite, trigger, induce”:

SughobchuqtaH ’e’ raj tlhIngan wo’.

Is there a Klingon idiom with a similar meaning to throw (something) back in (someone’s) face, in the sense of spitefully rejecting a gift?

MO: Yes. It’s nay’ lajQo’. The sort-of equivalent to “I throw it back in his/her face” would be nay’Daj vIlajQo’. In a restaurant, of course, this may have its literal meaning, especially if there were no -Daj. For the idiom, a possessive suffix on nay’ is required.