tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 27 15:40:18 2008
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: idea for writing system
- From: Fiat Knox <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: idea for writing system
- Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:39:18 +0100 (BST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=aLNHwr9/M8bBHM1zm03Ah+96wUqnlOBXheYFZ+QsP0wC+gIeIPlowiygKoHPVG/MfeIzMmeWnIrLL/6G8scdjprhDiSmFmQcVJI/dYu/a+4j4DKLk5Za/YIsq2fG84RPZSr0pYfPpK3d9Q+IQfp/SJTifFpAfxTCfRaKhFa5iQw=;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
--- DloraH <[email protected]> wrote:
> I was just pointing out that it wouldn't work if each
> suffix was represented by a single glyph.
> "thinkin'" breaks up that suffix and puts in another
> character. If -ing was represented by a single
> letter, how would you break it up to spell it
> differently?
Colloquial English would not necessarily end up parsing as
colloquial Klingon. The assumption is that "thinkin'" is a
shorthand way of saying "thinking" and the Klingon verb for
"think" would be the resulting word anyway.
As for "-luH" or "-la'" or indeed "-oy" which begins with a
vowel rather than a "'," perhaps they could be spelt letter
for letter, with the individual letter symbols representing
"l," "u," "H," "a" or "'" accordingly.
Or the writing system could have a single symbol for
"-able" that has no verbal translation, or at least none
obtained from "the interrogation of Maltz."
Question: does the "-luH / -la'" matter appear in KGT at
all? I don't have it handy. My memory of whether it's
referred to in KGT, even as a slang, is unclear.
__________________________________________________________
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html