tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 31 10:39:48 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: }} jIjot 'ej jIQuch

>From: [email protected]
>Date: Thu, 31 Aug 95 10:02:09 EST

>On Thu, 31 Aug 1995 thleghmeQ wrote:

>>[tlheghmeQ floats peacefully into the room]

><bang vIHot> jal ghotpu'

>(That's the closest I could get to, "People will say you're in love.")

I don't think I can accept this.  Well, let's start with one small point of
confusion: I don't see "jal" anywhere.  What is it?  Maybe it's missing
from my lookup.  I presume it means "say, gossip" (joS?), in which case it
would mean "People will say 'I'm in love'", i.e. each person will claim
he/she is in love, not that you, the addressee, is.

But  "Hot" also troubles me.  "Hot" is glossed as "touch, feel."  We
generally have taken Okrand's use of two words as explanatory and
restrictive, rather than additive.  That is, just because the word "call"
appears in the gloss of "pong" it doesn't mean that when you yell at
someone to come over you're performing the action of "pong".  Rather, it
means that Okrand is explaining the rest of the gloss: "pong" means "to
name (someone something), *as in* to call a person a particular name."  I
don't think you could say there was a "len" in one's legbone, despite the
fact that "break" appears in its definition.  (There are exceptions, I
think, such as "Ha'DIbaH" for "meat, animal", which is pretty plainly
additive).

So "Hot" to me seems to be the physical act of touching something, or to
feel something *in the sense* of putting your finger on it to determine
what it feels like.  It doesn't seem to be "to sense internally" (lolAad in
lAadan, a very useful word).  I've often wished for a good word for lolAad
in Klingon, but the closest we have to me seems to be "SIQ", which, I must
admit, has a certain appeal to it.  Or maybe "bech".

Similarly, we (as opposed to Glen Proechel, who has decided to interpret
things differently) have generally understood "bang" to be a *person*, not
an emotion.  That is "bang" means "love, *as in* my love, the person who is
loved" and not "love" the abstract emotion.  Note the canon use, where
valQIS calls whatsisname (Qugh?) "bangwI'"/my love.

Maybe "bang Daghaj net Har"/it will be believed that you have a beloved.  I
like the way that uses "net" (that's really what you wanted with your
"ghotpu'", if you think about it, I think), but it stretches "ghaj" a
little.  Then again, "ghaj" is already pretty stretched.

~mark

Back to archive top level