tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 09 09:23:29 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re[7]: ranks and titles (was Suppletion)
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re[7]: ranks and titles (was Suppletion)
- Date: Thu, 09 Nov 95 12:16:57 EST
On Wed, 8 Nov 1995 ghunchu'wI' wrote:
>Why must {puqbe'} be a type of child?
Well it doesn't.
>It's just as reasonable to think that it's a type of female. Can't we think of
>{puqloD} as primarily a male? It's just an "offspring" kind of male.
Yes, but it's still not consistent with other compound words. It's saying
<child female> or <child male>. Gives me visions of the Peter Pan syndrome.
But since we know very little of Klingon attitudes towards kids, I'll live with
it.
>(Maybe ~mark will *blink* again. :-)
And maybe M.O. will give us a totally different word for queen. I'm not holding
my breath. {{;-) >
r'Hul