tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 20 10:14:30 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Some risque (not "risky") interpretations



On 20 Jan 96 at 8:56, Susan Farmer wrote:

> I'm confused.  Mark Okrand gave us /nga'chuq/  To mate with
> (backtranslatable as to sex each other -- I know, a back translation
> is heresy :-)  )
> 
> You have a word *spoken* on a tape, that y'all have decided is
> spelled /ngagh/.  It's obvious to me that the spelling of the word
> on the tape should be /nga'/ becuase of /nga'chuq/.  Why are y'all
> so Certain that it's /ngagh/ when MO hasn't spoken?  (Except to
> provide /nga'chuq/??)

Because Marc Okrand GAVE us the correct spelling via Dr. Schoen in 
HolQeD 3:3. If the case had been less clear-cut I'm sure ~mark would 
have mentioned it. He's very careful about that sort of stuff (cf. 
his article on the new words from Power Klingon in HolQeD 3:2
for proof of that). 
> 
> tevram
> 
                                      maSqa'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "Had I not known that I was dead already, 
    I would have mourned the loss of my life"
              -Ota Dokan, Japanese poet
 (written while a knife protruded from his chest)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Back to archive top level