tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 27 12:52:50 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Pronunciation (Was: Re: KLBC: jItagh)
- From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Pronunciation (Was: Re: KLBC: jItagh)
- Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 15:50:56 -0400
>From: KLI Round Table Acct <[email protected]>
>Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 13:27:51 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: Re: Pronunciation (Was: Re: KLBC: jItagh)
>
>> I've come to the conclusion that "q" is almost exactly like a "k" in English,
>> and "Q" is a "k" with the German "ch" after it, and then "H" is simply the
>> German "ch" without any hard k at all... But I have a lot of trouble
>> getting my "Q"s to sound much different than my "H"s... :(
>>
>> ...Paul
>
>I don't believe this is a warranted conclusion to reach. Okrand tells us
>that the Klingon "q" is rather like the English "k" in "kumquat" only not
>quite. Not all that helpful. Though he does go on to describe tongue
>placement. I believe his example is there to let us know that the "k" is
>what a linguist would call a "stop" or a "plosive" sound, which describes
>the manner in which the phoneme is produced. The details on placement of
>the tongue round out the description. In fact, the really telling thing
>here is the placement which Okrand describes as being considerably
>further back in the mouth than is typical for the English "k" sound (or
>the Klingon "gh" or "H" for that matter).
>
>When Okrand compares "Q" to "H" and "q" he describes the "Q" as being
>raspy and strongly articulated. From this description (and his examples
>on the tapes) I have taken him to mean that the "Q" has the same manner
>as the "H," which is to say it is a "fricative" (not a "stop" or
>"plosive" like the "q") but that it is made in the same place as the "q"
>which makes sense given the delightful choking sound it produces.
>
>Comments?
>
>Lawrence
We could just chalk it up to dialect... :) However, I do disagree with
your reading on "Q". Especially given the ever-present example of
Qapla', I think it definitely has an impact signature, unlike "H", which
is a incremental buildup, with no impact spike.
Example: Try pronouncing Qapla', and then Hapla' (don't care if it's not
a word, just an example in pronounciation). If "Q" goes by your definition,
it would be VERY difficult to tell the difference. IMHO, the "H" takes on
more of a gutteral hiss. (I think I do the "H" really well, since I had
three years of practice in high school German class pronouncing "ich" and
all sorts of other "ch" words. Unfortunately, I can only get a good
gutteral "Q" out after eating a few Snickers bars, when my mouth and
throat are coated with chocolate... But if I eat too many, I won't be
a fit Klingon... ;)
...Paul