tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 10 07:20:40 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Re[6]: ranks and titles (was Suppletion)
I was typing this when my system got messed up yesterday... so now I'm
nicely far behind on my email.
>Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 18:27:33 -0800
>From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
>r'Hul writes:
>>I think that could be it. <puqbe'> (and <puqloD>) seem to be one of the few
>>compound nouns where the second noun describes the first. i.e. type of
>>child.
>Why must {puqbe'} be a type of child? It's just as reasonable to think
>that it's a type of female. Can't we think of {puqloD} as primarily a
>male? It's just an "offspring" kind of male.
[Mark M. wrote something similar]
>(Maybe ~mark will *blink* again. :-)
I did think of this, and it did seem to me more logical that "son" should
be a type of "child" and not a type of "man"... but then again, there's no
real reason necessarily for that.
I think part of the problem may be that no matter which direction you look
at it, "puqbe'" *is* a little unusual for a compound noun. Klingon
compound nouns that we've seen all tend to be close (if not identical) in
meaning to their N-N analogues. "jolpa'" is a room which is associated
with a transport beam. A veSDuj is a ship associated with war. "puqbe'"
is different. It's not two nouns in genitive construction or otherwise
modifying one another so much as two nouns in *apposition*. A "puqbe'" is
less a female's child or a child's female than a female who *is* a child
(and vice-versa). That's not really the same as most of the rest of the
compound nouns we've seen. I suppose you could say that "puqbe'" is a
"childish sort of woman" (and ?be'puq would be a womanly sort of child),
claiming that, say, veSDuj is a warlike kind of ship, but from looking at
the compound nouns I've seen, this doesn't seem to be the more common way
of making compounds.
I still think "ta'be'" is likely okay and will stand. One thing's for
sure: stand or fall, it will be by its own merits meaningwise; the
homophony "problem" to me is completely a non-issue.
~mark