tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 26 15:00:00 2011
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] paq'batlh: NEW USES OF KNOWN WORDS
<div><br></div>'ISqu':<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
{ghal} – n. envoy (p. 40)<br>
I think someone (ghunchu'wI'?) explained the possible origin of<br>
this particular meaning of {ghal}: MO probably mistook the verb {ghal},<br>
which means "to envy", for the similar-looking noun "envoy"<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I asked MO about this at the qepHom'a'. He said that he didn't remember supplying the Dramatis Personae (so it might have been compiled by someone else after the main text was finished), but he took responsibility for not catching the error during final proofreading. (So if someone is worried that {ghal} might be canonised as a noun meaning "envoy", you can relax; MO has said it's an error.)</div>
<div><br></div><div>Something else that may be of interest is that MO mentioned that he didn't write some of the footnotes. He was flipping through the book when he stopped at a page and pointed at a footnote and said something along the lines of he hadn't seen that before or didn't remember seeing it before. I believe it was the explanation of {petaQ} on p. 70, but I'm not completely sure since I was looking at the book upside-down (or, um, at a negative angle). He then said that some of the non-Klingon parts of the text were not written by him, or were changed from his draft. If someone else who was present saw what he was pointing at or heard more clearly what he said about it, please share. But the gist of it was that outside of the main body of the text, we can't assume that everything was written by MO.</div>
<div> </div></div>-- <br>De'vID<br>
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol