tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 16 18:00:53 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
pab mu'mey
- From: "Neal Schermerhorn" <[email protected]>
- Subject: pab mu'mey
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1998 21:08:38 -0400
Thinking about this list's rule of writing in languages other than Klingon
only if discussing the Klingon language, I thought about how to refer to the
grammatical terms in the Klingon language.
The three main types of words - nouns <DIpmey>, verbs <wotmey> and leftovers
<chuvmey> - are defined clearly. But we refer to a single noun as <DIp> and
a single verb as <wot> - can we refer to a single word categorized as a
leftover as <chuv>? Does the existence of the plural form empower us to
infer the singular here? Is it possible that <chuv> can only be the verb "be
left over"? (chaq DuH Hoch...)
Looking at the leftover types listed on p. 77, the bulk of them are readily
translatable. Not to say my translations are the best way to do it, or that
a 'real' Klingon would have a clue what I was talking about.
adverbial <DelmeH mu'> - not my favorite in the list...
conjuction <rarmeH mu'>
exclamation <jachmeH mu'> - also rather uninspired...
number <mI'>
question word <tlhobmeH mu'>
We also can simply use <pong> for a proper noun. More complicated, <DIp
DelmeH wot> for an adjectival verb.
But, how in the world could we say "pronoun" with the existing vocabulary?
Bear in mind that the Klingon pronoun can clarify the subject or object when
it might otherwise be ambiguous, can stress the same when it is not
ambiguous, and can act without a <wot> as a sort of "pro-verb" to imply
being a thing or at a location. While the other terms (with the provisional
exception of the adverbial - I cannot find the word to use, but I know it's
there someplace) are readily translatable in terms of how TKD defines them,
the pronoun defies my best attempts.
Any takers?
Qermaq