tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 21 14:15:12 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KBLC: critique requested for personal "slogan"...
>Date: Fri, 17 Feb 1995 17:18:10 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: "Silauren, Half-Elven" <[email protected]>
>On Fri, 17 Feb 1995, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>> >..vaj reH nISwI'wIj ray' chaHtaHjaj jaghpu'wI''e'.
>>
>> "May my enemies always be my disruptor's targets."
>exactly what i intended.
>> Grammatically it works, tho I must say I prefer "pu'HIch" to your "nISwI'",
>> your note notwithstanding. nISwI' sounds like a calque to me. I'd stick
>> with pu'HIch; Okrand likely never gave thought to the fact that Klingons
>> always use disruptors and not phasers.
>"calque"? hrm... must remember to check the dictionary when i get home.
>well, what do you think of <nISwI'HIch>? compounding with <HIch>
>indicates that it is a hand-held weapon.
It was never the "HIch" compounding that bothered or didn't bother me. I
just don't like "nISwI'" for "disruptor" in the sense of the weapon.
Sounds to me as likely to mean a guy who keeps you from doing something.
> and you may very well be
>correct, Okrand may intend <pu'HIch> for any advanced handheld energy
>weapon. *shrug* perhaps, in order to specify between a phaser energy
>weapon and a disruptor energy weapon, one needs to specify by
>manufacturer: <tlhIngan pu'HIch> for a disruptor; <'ejyo' pu'HIch> for a
>Starfleet-issue phased energy weapon.
>comments?
Sounds sensible to me.
~mark