tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 08 14:54:10 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -Curses
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: -Curses
- Date: Wed, 08 Jul 1998 16:54:03 CDT
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Wed, 08 Jul 1998 11:34:46 -0700
Steven, I hope you don't take this personally.
I wanted to avoid this, so I didn't say whom I quoted.
> :> Seriously, Okrand labeled them as "Epithets" on page 178. That's a term
> :> with a specific grammatical meaning, and I'm going to use them that way.
> :
> : it is an ENGLISH term, however. Klingon "epithets" are exclamations.
>
> No, the "general invectives" -- baQa', ghay'cha', Hu'tegh, Qu'vatlh, va,
> QI'yaH, etc. -- are exclamations.
>
both "general invectives" and "epithets" are classified as Exclamations
in my TKD. (5.5 Exclamations, pp 57-58 and 178)
"Idiot!" certainly is "name-calling" isn't it? yet the expletive
"forms a sentence of its own" thus qualifies as a Klingon exclamation.
I don't think "epithetical exclamation" is an oxymoron.
> b) exclamatory word or phrase; esp: one that is obscene or profane
>
> Expletives (according to (b)) also include such non-swear exclamations as
> toH, maj, majQa' and so on. But we were speaking about epithets, which are
> not the same thing.
>
I'm not sure how Merriam-Webster usually works in its explanations.
but do they really mean to say that ANY exclamation is an expletive?
anyway in KLINGON they are all exclamations. SOME are used for mu'qaD veS
others are not.
> : Merriam Webster's doesn't have any authority on Klingon curses
>
> Perhaps not, but for two centuries Webster's dictionary does have authority
> on American English -- the language Marc Okrand speaks natively, studied
> linguistics in university in, and chose to write his dissertation on Mutsun
> grammar and his several books and tapes on Klingon grammar in. Presumably,
> a Ph.D. in linguistics will use common grammatical terms in their generally
> accepted usage, particularly when explaining things for a lay audience,
> unless he states otherwise and redefines his terms.
>
so? I didn't object to calling some exclamations "epithets".
I just objected to drawing conclusions from that to the effect
of making them something else than "exclamations".
> Has Okrand done this, even in a private communication with you? If so,
> would you care to share it with the rest of us? I'm always on the lookout
> for new insights from the language's creator for my files. If you're going
I never claimed anything like that. In the part you snipped, I said:
Maybe epithets work like nouns, maybe not.
I just haven't seen any convincing argument for them working like nouns.
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]