tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Dec 22 13:46:41 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qamuSHa'ta'
>Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1994 00:56:48 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: Terry Donnelly <[email protected]>
>ghItlh charghwI':
>> According to Terry Donnelly:
>>>
>>> The recent discussion of how to say 'love' reminded me of a poem I
>>> wrote a while ago. Please critique this:
>>>
>>>
>>> qamuSHa'ta'
>>>
>>> qamuSHa'ta'; chaq qa'wIjDaq
>>> wej Heghchu' bangwIj'e'.
>>
>> 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.
>[deletions]
>>> chaq latlh bang rap Dalaj.
>>
>> This seems a little confusing. "Perhaps you accept
>> another's same lover."?
>The proper way to interpret it is to use {bang} as an abstract noun,
>modified by {rap}, in a noun-noun possessive with {latlh}: "similar love
>of another" (OBTW, {rap} doesn't mean "the same", it means "similar";
>there is a difference.)
Actually, this is Yet Another point of discussion with Glen. Glen contends
that "bang" can mean abstract love as well as a beloved person, based on
the wording in the TKD. Me, I don't buy that; all through TKD, Okrand uses
multiple definitions not additively but cumulatively, to explain one
another, not to add meaning on top of meaning. It wouldn't make sense for
him to throw such disparate meanings together and not even draw our
attention to it.
Notably, the one canon source for the word "bang" is someone being called
"joHwI', bangwI' je" (my lord, and my love.) It's reasonable that Okrand
had the English line in mind when doing the translalation, which would make
him put "love" instead of "beloved" or something.
Oh, and "rap" *does* mean "be the same"; check TKD. Maybe you meant "rur"?
(and then there's nIb...)
~mark