tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 02 06:39:39 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: New words in HolQeD 5.1

ghunchu'wI' wrote:

>"Yes and no"?! *Your* point was that there weren't any examples where
>the separate Klingon words didn't mean the same thing as the separate
>English words. I gave a perfectly valid example of exactly that.

Hey, you cut the sentence where I said "I give."  What more do you want? ;-)

>*Of course* the concepts "pneumatic hypo" and "medicine transferrer" match,
>as do "reactor" and "radiation changer" -- that's why they were translated
>the way they were. How would you say "carnivore" in Klingon? Probably
>{Ha'DIbaH SopwI'}, no? "Meat eater" isn't the same *word* as "carnivore",
>but it's the same idea.

Bad example.  "carnivore" does mean meat eater, just in another language. (Latin
right?)  But in terms of my original statement, I admit it was wrong.  But only 
because I generalized too much.  

>>But lets look at the patterns. Those examples are both <wI'> nouns.
>
>I'd like to see where you're taking this...I've probably been there.
>What do you find remarkable about the patterns?

You know, I wasn't going anywhere with it.  But it is starting to look 
suspicious.  But it would definitely require more study than I've got time for. 
>From just a few examples, the ones that completely change their words are the 
ones that contain verb-wI'(Or verb-ghach as you pointed out.).  The ones that 
were always nouns don't seem to do it. (But I could be wrong, it won't be the 
last time.)  Do you know of any examples?



r'Hul

Back to archive top level