tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 31 16:12:33 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Re[2]: new vocabulary in ST:K (CD-ROM)
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: Re[2]: new vocabulary in ST:K (CD-ROM)
- Date: Sat, 01 Jun 1996 01:00:41 +0200
At 11:39 AM 28/5/96 -0400, you wrote:
>beHwI"av: "If this is indeed the case then {ghob} would show, to me in any
>case, that Klingons would not mutilate their enemies. (See my posting on
pIqaD)
>Why els would {ghob} have the meanings: "ethics (N)" and "do battle" & "wage
>war" (I assume that these are Verbs.)"
>
>Why is mutilating a fallen enemy unethical?
Because, as I keep saying, would one bring dishonor on a most honorable foe?
My answer, as a Klingon, would be: "NO!"
>Are you sure you're thinking like a Klingon?
Yes, because I think of it in terms of honorable, 1.good name, 2.outward
respect or symbol of this, 5.something or someone worthy of respect,
6.integrity (adherence to a code of values), and dishonorable, opposite. Why
els would Klingons be obsessed with "honor"???
>Or, if it is now unethical, I'd like to point out that my original
>suggestion (that of marking kills) was about how writing arose in Klingon
>prehistory. Perhaps ethics were different then.
That I didn't see, but I believe that Klingons have a reasonably feudalistic
approch to live, as did the Knights of medieval times.
Qapla'
beHwI"av