tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 22 23:03:03 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: meqleH (again)
ja' Jeroen Vantroyen <[email protected]>:
>I do know why I'm asking this question. I'm cuurently doing an exam on
>Klingons. There's only one question I can't answer : "What is the meaning
>of the word meqleH?". You see why I need to know?
No, I don't see why you need to know. What is this exam? Who decides
whether or not your answer is correct?
The meaning of the word {meqleH} is the one-handed sword that looks a
lot like a smaller version of a {betleH}, end of definition. If you
want to know the meaning of the name of that sword, however...
ja' De'vID:
>To take a complete stab in the dark, since as everyone has pointed
>out no one really knows the origin of the word, if I absolute had to
>guess (in a test situation) I would say <matlh 'etlh> "sword of
>loyalty" based (very very very loosely) on KGT p 60. That'll
>probably fool your examiner, unless your examiner is Marc Okrand.
I was going to suggest the same extremely speculative possibility, with
an emphasis on the fact that there's no known noun meaning "loyalty".
The phrase {betleH quv} uses {quv} to make clear that it's the {batlh
'etlh} being discussed; {meqleH matlh} is compellingly similar except
for the lack of a noun counterpart of {matlh}. It's at least a *little*
likely that the same archaic usage that gives {betleH} for the present
{sword of honor} might have had {meqleH} meaning "sword of loyalty".
-- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh