tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 15 12:47:44 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: holy man
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC: holy man
- Date: Sun, 15 Dec 96 19:33:56 UT
December 14, 1996 9:50 PM, jatlh SuSvaj:
> However, if what is meant by "Holy man" is a
> priest or cleric, the best attempt (in fact the only attempt) I have seen
> to describe this was in the KSRP's translation of Hamlet, in which the
> priest was referred to as *lalDan 'utlh*, meaning "religion officer".
toH! mu'vam vIlIj! majQa', SuSvaj!
> If
> instead, what is meant is a religious person, then, perhaps, *lalDan
> ghajbogh nuv* (Did I say this correctly SuStel?), meaning "person who has
> religion" would work.
What, you're holding religion in your hand? There are cases where {ghaj} has
been used to refer to something other than actual possession (the only one I
can think of offhand is {pIch vIghajbe'}), but I don't think it works this
time.
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 96957.7