tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Feb 21 13:34:12 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: la'Hom vs. ra'wI' QIv
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: la'Hom vs. ra'wI' QIv
- Date: Sat, 21 Feb 1998 13:32:40 -0800
At 11:18 98-02-17 -0800, Qob wrote:
}[email protected] wrote:
}>
}> I've noted Sarah's rank in the recent logs I've been posting as <ra'wI' QIv>,
}> because I checked an issue of HolQeD and found that listing there. However, I
}> remember someone using <la'Hom> also, and I realize that I like that better
}> than <ra'wI' QIv>. Does it matter which one I use?
}
}Neither is "official" tlhIngan Hol; the rank list is on page 52 of KGT.
}
}That being said, I prefer (and use) {la'Hom} for a number of reasons.
}First, it quite nicely expresses "less than a Commander but more than a
}lieutenant" with a noun suffix designed to do just that. If you
}translate it "sub-commander" {la'Hom} makes perfect sense. Also, this
}method works quite well for "Lieutenant Junior Grade" {SochHom}... and
}is much shorter! Finally, it just FEELS more Klingon to me (a highly
}subjective reason, yes... and didn't we have that discussion already?
}<g>)
}
}Qob, no longer a {la'Hom}
I have become so used to the Klingon ranks on TrekMUSE that lagh, SoghHom,
Sogh la'Hom, la', HoD, totlh, 'ajHom, 'aj, 'aj'a' sems an utterly normal
progression.
I'm happy to accept in fiction or translation (which is what all this is,
after all) any rank system that makes grammatical sense in Klingon. I
suppose I shouldn't really have let ra'wI' QIv pass without a comment, but
someone else commented, so qay'be'.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian