tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 29 06:40:11 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Klingon in the News

mujang peHruS:
><< And I don't think anyone *ever*
> figured out what you meant by {'uywI' beQwI'}.. >>
>
>This is not from me.  I do remember seeing {beQwI'} in Hamlet for "shelf."
>This is an outright fabrication by the translators.

Maybe I should suggest that you read what *you* write before accusing
people of lying?  Permit me to refresh your memory.

Back in March of 1988, you posted a story about Theo's adventures in a
world without certain inventions.  In the context of trying to smooth
clothing, you used the phrase {'uywI' beQwI'}, which SuStel guessed 
was an attempt to describe an iron.  Your response to him:

|>"iron" 'oSbe' {'uywI' beQwI'}.  yIloyqa'!
|>paq HamletDaq mu' {beQwI'} botu'laH.

I pointed out that nobody would have any idea you were thinking about 
Hamlet when you wrote the phrase, and asked for some more information 
so we might have a better chance of understanding it.  You replied:

|>And, finally, {'uywI' beQwI'} comes earlier on, but I'll leave it for more 
|>speculation for now.

*I* refused to speculate, especially since your next sentence was:

|>In conclusion, this article was posted for communication, not guessing games.

In the more than ten months since you used the phrase {'uywI' beQwI'},
I haven't seen it explained.  At least you told us what {maqwI' ghom} 
was supposed to represent when I commented on how its meaning wasn't 
apparent.  Knowing what you wanted to say opened the way to explore
other more obvious or expressive vocabulary -- even if it looks like 
you rejected your own wording because you thought it was mine.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level