tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 27 19:14:09 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: My old neighbor



On Thu, 24 Dec 1998 23:20:48 -0800 (PST) [email protected] 
wrote:

> In a message dated 12/23/1998 10:43:49 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:
> 
> << SuStel: 
>  : Why should {nI'} be able to describe an aspect of a noun, rather than a
>  : noun?  {nI'} means "be lengthy (in duration)," and {jIl nI'} means "the
>  : neighbor who is lengthy in duration."  Nonsense.  You're trying to describe
>  : the time over which you've known the neighbor, not the neighbor himself.
>   >>
> 
> The more I think about this debate, the more I DO like jIl nI' for the
> translation of "a long-time friend."  I have a feeling that there is evidence
> within the unseparable parts of the Klingon words for "grandfather" and for
> "grandmother," too.
> 
> Although some of you will say that this is not quite true for "brother" and
> for "sister," I can conceive of the idea that Klingons intrinsically think of
> siblings as "long-term" relatives.  As a matter of fact, such relatives may
> continue to be relatives even after death.
> 
> peHruS

I felt open to the idea of using {jIl nI'} until I heard this 
explanation. No. This one REALLY doesn't work. You are taking 
polysyllabic nouns and assuming that one of the syllables is 
actually a verb in a noun-verb composit similar to a compound 
noun, but without the grammatical justification. No. It just 
doesn't work.

Perhaps {jIl nI'} might work because the naming of the noun is 
based upon a relationship and that relationship has a duration 
as much as any time period or life (nouns for which {nI'} is 
used in canon), but any argument based upon {loDnI'}, {vavnI'} 
and its ilk is so thoroughly baseless that it makes me want to 
join those who most sternly reject the idea of {jIl nI'}.

charghwI' 'utlh



Back to archive top level