tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 13 06:03:38 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: opinions on Orthography & Phonetics



On Oct 12, 10:30pm, The Songbringer -- Marnen to the common fol k wrote:
> Subject: Re: opinions on Orthography & Phonetics
> 
> jatlh charghwi':
> : 
> : 
> : On Oct 12, 12:54am, DSTRADER@delphi.com wrote:
> [...]
> : > Any /'/ that seperates two vowels does nothing more than seperate
> : > the vowels, and it tends to leans toward the second syllable. 
> : 
> :      Sorry, dude. You have no case. There's nothing in TKD, CK, TNG or
> : anything in the movie series to back you up. Nada. Pagh. Rien. El Zero.
> I don't have the original post handy, so I'm not exactly sure what the
context
> of this was, but I'd agree with DSTRADER that if there's only one >'<
between
> two vowels, it will belong to the second syllable at least 99% of the time.
> There is only one known Klingon morpheme that begins with a vowel: >-oy<,
the
> suffix of endearment, and even here, Okrand has sanctioned the insertion of
>'<
> in the event that the previous morpheme ends with a vowel. I think DSTRADER
has
> more than "Nada. Pagh. Rien. El Zero." to back him up (and BTW -- what
about
> that capital P in "Pagh."?).
> 
> : 
> : --   charghwI'
> : 
> : 
> 
> Qapla' Qichqemwi'vo'.

     Sorry for the long intro, but this misunderstanding apparently came from
my opting to edit out too much of the post I was originally responding to.
The opinion I was dismissing was that if you have a glottal stop (') at the
beginning of a verb, when you add a prefix to it, it somehow is supposed to
stop being a glottal stop and instead, you are supposed to pronounce the two
vowels just smoothly gliding into each other. That is the opinion for which I
believe there is no basis. It is still a glottal stop SEPARATING the two
vowels, even if it were silent when the verb is spoken with no prefix.

--   charghwI'



Back to archive top level