tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 17 07:51:42 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Dragons and ketchup

Steven Boozer ([email protected])



mIq'ey wrote:
>Well, my eagerly-awaited copy of KGT arrived this week, and I immediately 
>noticed {lung} and {qettlhup}.  So I had to try this:
>
>   {lung malja' yIniSQo' bIngalmo' 'ej bI'eymo' Dutlhejchugh qettlhup}

"don't disrupt (interfere with) dragon business because you're chewy and 
(you're) delicious, if ketchup accompanies you"

Clearly I don't recognize this quote!

>Since there doesn't seem to be a word for "crunchy",

Not knowing what you're trying to say, I think {ngal} is pretty close, 
though {tlher} might do in a pinch:

   In terms of texture, Klingon food may be {ngal} ("chewy"),
   {char} ("slimy"), or {tlher} ("lumpy"), all considered
   positive attributes (depending, of course, on the particular
   dish).  (KGT 84f.)

>I had thought to do something with {choptaH}, on the order of "one can 
>gnaw you",

{choptaH} "it bites continuously, it keeps on biting"

>but I ran up against the fact that both {-lu} and {-laH} are type 5 
>suffixes and thus, as I understand it, can't coexist.  Is there any way 
>around this?  (It's surprising that {-laH} is type 5 given that other 
>suffixes I would consider semantically similar, such as {-qang} and 
>{-rup}, are type 2.)

Keep reading.  That very problem is addressed later in KGT (p. 181):

   Among those suffixes that can never occur together are {-lu'}
   (indefinite subject indicator) and {-laH} (can, able). The former
   is used when the subject is unknown or indefinite, often translated
   into Federation Standard by means of the passive voice: {jagh jonlu'}
   ("One captures the enemy", or "The enemy is captured"). The latter
   is used to express ability: {jagh jonlaH} ("He/she can capture the
   enemy"). If it is desirable to express the ideas of "indefinite
   subject" and "ability" at the same time, such as in the sentences
   "One can capture the enemy" or "The enemy can be captured", it is
   not uncommon to use the noun {vay'} (somebody, anybody) as the subject
   of the sentence: {jagh jonlaH vay'} ("Somebody can capture the enemy",
   or "Anybody can capture the enemy"). Nevertheless, some speakers seem
   to want to put the two concepts into a single word, and, on rare
   occasion, they will do so. Rather than violating the rules by using
   the two suffixes sequentially (that is, {-lu'laH} or {-laHlu'}),
   however, these speakers will say either {-luH} or {-la'}, employing
   totally artificial, made-up suffixes formed by fusing {-lu'} and
   {-laH}, as in {jagh jonluH} or {jagh jonla'} ("The enemy can be
   captured"). No one accepts such constructions as grammatical; their
   inappropriateness, the way they grate on the Klingon ear, is exactly
   what gives them elocutionary clout. A visitor may hear one of these
   odd suffixes occasionally, but, as with other intentionally ungram-
   matical forms, it is best to avoid using them until one is extremely
   comfortable with the nuances of Klingon style.

FYI Okrand used the {vay'} method in SkyBox S8:

   yIntaHvIS qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay' batlh 'etlhvam chenmoHlu'pu'
   this sword of honor descends from the time of Kahless the Unforgettable

   {qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'} "Kahless, whom no one can forget"

BTW this "intentional ungrammaticality" - bending the rules for rhetorical 
effect - is further discussed later in KGT (p. 176):

   Sometimes words or phrases are coined for a specific occasion,
   intentionally violating grammatical rules in order to have an
   impact. Usually these are never heard again, though some gain
   currency and might as well be classified as slang. Klingon
   grammarians call such forms {mu'mey ru'} ("temporary words").
   Sometimes, mu'mey ru' fill a void--that is, give voice to an
   idea for which there is no standard (or even slang) expression;
   sometimes, like slang, they are just more emphatic ways of ex-
   pressing an idea. A common way to create these constructions
   is to bend the grammatical rules somewhat, violating the norm
   in a way that is so obvious that there is no question that it
   is being done intentionally. To do this is expressed in Klingon
   as {pabHa'} ("misfollow [the rules], follow [the rules] wrongly").



--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons






Back to archive top level