tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 19 16:52:11 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Verbs of Saying
- From: "qe'San - Jon Brown" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Verbs of Saying
- Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 16:47:53 -0700 (PDT)
>SuStel wrote:
>Wed, 19 Aug 1998 14:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
>
>>>From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>
>>>
>>---qe'San - Jon Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Kahless called his new weapon 'the sword of honour' -
>>> {nuH chu'Daj pongpu' qeylIS'e' . batlh 'etlh } .
>>
>>/pongpu'/ implies to me that someone later changed the name. Just
>>/pong/ for simple past tense.
>>
I thought Klingons did change the name. I thought it was now either:
'The Sword of Kahless' when referring to the actual personal weapon
or
'Batleth' {betlheH} when referring to the type of weapon.
>Putting aside the question of {pong} as a verb of saying for a
moment, I
>don't see a problem with using {-pu'} here.
>
Neither do I, even if the name had not changed. The act of naming
being described was done/completed/finished.
>nuH chuDajvaD batlh 'etlh pongpu' qeylIS.
>Kahless named his sword "the sword of honor."
>
>pongpu'
>had named
>
>The {-pu'} implies the naming was already done, not that the
possession of
>the name was over.
Thank you.
>
>I don't think {pong} means "recognize (something) as having the name
of."
>After all, how could Klingons "regularly" {roD} name Qo'noS "the
Homeworld"
>if {pong} refers to the recognition of something's "correct" name?
>
roD 'oHvaD juHqo' ponglu' neH
I thought to get 'simply the Homeworld' {neH} would need to follow
'Homeworld' and not {ponglu'} ??
>
>SuStel
>
qe'San
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com