tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 22 11:39:08 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qamuSHa'ta'
According to Terry Donnelly:
>
> ghItlh charghwI':
...
> > Hmm. Remember that {bang} refers to a person in Klingon, not an
> > abstract emotion.
>
> *My* copy ot TKD defines {bang} as "love, one who is loved". I don't get
> any sense from this that {bang} refers only to persons. On the contrary,
> my reading of that definition implies that the personalization is a
> function of the abstract meaning, in the same way that we might call
> someone "My love" in English.
This is an argument I've had a few times before. Whenever a
word appears in TKD defined on the English-Klingon side with
multiple words separated by a comma, it is quite reasonable to
presume that Okrand is using the convention that he describes
in TKD on page 78-79 in the following paragraph:
--------------
For ease of reference, English entries in the English-Klingon
section of this dictionary begin with the word that the user
would most likely be looking for, even though this may at times
be grammatically incorrect. This first word is, when
appropriate, followed by the correct translation... Similarly,
when a Klingon word is translated into an English phrase (e.g.,
"have a headache"), the first word in the English entry is the
key word in the phrase, followed by the proper translation
(e.g., "headache, have a headache).
--------------
In this case, you are quite unlikely to look up "one who is
loved" alphabetically next to "one". You are much more likely
to look it up under "love". I think it is a mistake to think
{bang} means "love" as either a noun or a verb. {bang} means
"one who is loved" and the entire "love" entry is just there to
help you find it in the word list.
Okrand is not entirely consistent in this kind of useage, since
he sometimes places synonyms separated by commas in the
English-Klingon side of the word list, while other times both
synonyms exist as independent entries. This gets frustrating
when you try to assemble your own word list.
Still, this particular example appears to be a perfect case of
the first word NOT being the literal translation of the word.
Just because you want a word for "love" doesn't mean Okrand
gave you one.
...
> Is charghwI' the only person allowed to respond to requests for
> critiques? Note that I did *not* post this to the KLBC. While I value
> charghwI''s comments, I'd like to hear from others, as well.
If you DO post with KLBC, I am supposed to respond first. If
you don't, then ~mark or Krankor are supposed to respond first.
The reason the grammarians are supposed to respond first is to
avoid the chaos that happens when every question gets
redundently replied to by every member inclined to reply. If
someone else wishes to make further comment after a grammarian
has had the opportunity to reply, then it is fine for anybody
to reply to anything.
I have basically been stepping beyond the bounds of Beginners'
Grammarian with the real Grammarian's blessing because of the
labor drain involving other tasks of the people in this group.
Krankor has had personal business keep him away for an
extended, but temporary time and ~mark has been very busy
setting up the MUSH and editing Hamlet.
I've checked in with ~mark from time to time to make sure he is
not offended by my responding to things before him and so far
he has said that he appreciates what I've been doing. I remain
quite prepared to step back as soon as any aspect of the
current situation changes.
In part, the line for which posts should go to BG and which
should go to the general Grammarian is a fuzzy one. Since
beginners are, well, new here, we have a constant supply of
people who don't have a clue as to what KLBC means, so they
post and they are new and well suited to the BG's response,
even without the KLBC banner. Still, I've gone beyond even
those bounds from time to time in the interest of simple
efficiency. It helps people to get a response quickly; to get
an answer while the question still burns to be answered. ~mark,
while still doing an impressive job of responding to posts,
especially with his other projects, is not quite keeping up on
his mail as tightly as I've seen him do in earlier times, so
my intent is to just help out.
And I AM touchy about any misperception that I've declared
myself THE Grammarian for the list. That's a post Krankor
invented and sustained well for years, then passed on to ~mark
during a time when Krankor knew himself to be unavailable. They
then shared that role when Krankor came back. It is still
Krankor's role and ~mark's role. I'm just filling in until
Hamlet is done or Krankor returns, or until one of them tells
me I post too much, or that it is a good time for someone else
to be BG.
> - ter'eS
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |