tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 23 05:38:28 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Appleyard's analogic
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Appleyard's analogic
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 08:34:01 -0500
>Subject: Word for `English'
>Date: 95-01-23 03:48:43 EST
>From: [email protected] (A.Appleyard)
>Someone said that {DIvI' Hol} is canonical for `English'. But my Klingon ->
[...]
It's supposed to be "Federation Standard," but {DIvI'} really refers to
federations or organizations in general, unless thought of as a shortening of
{yuQjIjDIvI'}, the full title, "United Federation of Planets."
[...]
>I recently used {bav} = "(v) orbit" as a noun as an analogical extension,
and
>this caused comment; what is the opinion on these other extensions of usage
>which people may make?
I don't recall ever seeing it. You should really post more Klingon to the
list. It's much better practice and gets more positive (not argumentative)
reactions from people and it's funner to read.
>(a) Does {yoD} = "(v,n) shield" mean ONLY "protective force field" like
round
>a spaceship? Or can it also be used for a knight-in-armour or riot-police
>or native tribal warrior etc type shield made of matter?
The meaning of {yoD} is most likely able to extend to all these usages, that
is, for magnetic or other kinds of force fields, as well as physical
barriers. Other uses of {yoD} which do not include these may be somewhat
figurative, but entirely usable. I'm all for figurativity.
Incidentally, this would be entirely more acceptable than changing the
grammatical nature of words, as in the case of {bav}. People won't understand
*{qachbav jIyIt}, but they will all readily understand {qach vIbav
jIyIttaHvIS} or {qach vIbavmeH jIyIt} or some such.
>(b) Does {Duj} = "(n) ship,vessel" mean only spacecraft? or can it be used
for
>water craft as in English? (Someone recently said that some people used
{Duj}
>to mean their cars!)
{Duj} is most common for space vessels, so if you wanted to talk of another
kind of ship, you may have to specify it, e.g., {bIQDuj}, and {yavDuj} for
car.
>(c) TKD says that {ghItlh} = "(v) write, (n) manuscript". Does {ghItlh}
(noun)
>thus mean ONLY "the first or master copy of a book or article"? Or is the
>common understandable extension of its meaning to mean "letter on paper" (to
>distinguish from {jabbI'ID} = "email message") theoretically OK?
{ghItlh} just means anything written down as a noun, and the act of writing
as a verb. Okrand also told "HolQeD" (3:2, I think) that it also can mean
"mark" without really writing words, just any act of scrawling markings onto
a surface.
>(d) Does {logh} mean only "outer (= interstellar or interplanetary) space"?
Or
>can it also mean gaps between words or objects etc as in English? (Compare
>Greek usage: (double vowel = long) {diasteema} = "space between words or
>objects etc", and in MODERN Greek also "outer space"; but in Ancient Greek
>"outer space, the Void" was instead called {kha(w)os} from the verb root
>{kha}, {khn} = "gape, be wide open" (Note: modern "chaos" = "disorder" came
>from uninformed wrong guesses by theorizing mediaeval theologians.).)
We know from canon that {logh} means outer space and not space between,
around, among objects. We do have nouns like {joj}, {Dung}, {retlh}, etc.
>TKD says that {'ejyo'} = "Starfleet", {'ejyo'waw'} = "starbase". Do these
mean
>only those of the Federation (as the word `Starfleet' is used in Star Trek)?
>Or can they mean the Klingons', or any space power's, space fleet and bases?
{waw'} is "base" by itself. {'ejyo'waw'} could only mean "Starfleet base."
Actually, maybe not, since {'ejDo'} means any "starship." I might guess that
{'ejyo'} could mean any "starfleet" but is used most commonly to refer to the
Starfleet run by the {yuQjIjDIvI'}.
>`Worf': someone's suggested amendment *{worv} is also not standard tlhIngan
>Hol. (Note: the cases "cough" and "laugh" of modern English `gh' pronounced
>`f' derive from not {gh} or {H} but {HH}: Anglo-Saxon {cohh-}, {hlaehh-}.)
That's Anglo-Saxon. Not all languages would evolve the same way for sure. I
recall Okrand telling us that Worf's real name is {wI'orv}, even tho that
still violates phonology. Couldn't it have come out of another dialect or
another Klingon language? Names in a language often don't fit right in with
the phonology, but {wI'orv} is a bit much. I dunno.
Hope I've answered some of your questions.
Guido