tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 11 08:32:35 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Sov mu'mey
>Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 21:32:57 -0500
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: Terry Donnelly <[email protected]>
>{Sov mu'} proverb
>{targhHom} targlet = baby targ
>{tIch} (n) insult
>{nong} (n) passion
A word about your words. You must be careful about coining words like
these; we have no evidence that you can, in general. "Sov mu'" is
grammatically OK (since Sov is a noun also), but "knowledge word" is what I
call a "hindsight word". It's a coining that makes sense only in
hindshight, once you already know what it means. If I came across
"knowledge word" in the middle of nowhere, unprepared, I really wouldn't
know what it meant. You might consider "paQDI'norgh" or "paQDI'norgh
mu'tlhegh" or even "paQDI'norghHom".
"targhHom" works okay. It need not necessarily be a baby targh, but it
certainly could be.
Your last two, though, are dangerous. Okrand himself says that not all
verbs have simple noun equivalents. Glen Proechel's statements to the
contrary notwithstanding, you can't blithely decide that this or that verb
can be used as a noun unmarked. For "insult", we have the word from Power
Klingon "mu'qaD" which is glossed as "curse" but from the examples seems to
mean more "insult" than "expression of ill-will." As to "passion", well,
you may have to satisfy yourself with "nongtaHghach", which Okrand has
sanctioned, or else recast. But inventing nouns is not doing proper
Klingon.
>reH SuvtaH targhmey 'ach targhHom yap tu'lu'.
"lutu'lu'", since the targhHom is being used as a plural here?
>jagh DaSuvpa' HoSDaj DaSovbe'.
maj.
>ngab 'oy'; ratlh tIch.
Hmm. mu'qaD doesn't work for "state of being insulted"; I hadn't read this
when I made my comments above. I'm not sure that "tIch" as a noun works
either. Maybe "quv Duy'"? Lacks a little of the punch.
>Duvo'taHchugh nong DeghlIj DevnIS meq.
I always assumed "meq" was "reason" in the ssense of "why something
happens". But then again, it's given as the verb as well, so I suppose I
can't really complain about using it for "dispassionate thought."
>nuqanchoHmoH DIS 'ach nuvalchoHmoH veS.
maj
>DuqeStaHvIS jup QaH'eghmeH jatlh.
maj.
~mark