tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 24 19:33:24 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: yIqIm: Hol in books



>Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 11:10:10 -0700
>From: [email protected] (Soqra'tIS)

>yIqIm:

'Iv?  If you're addressing us all, "peqIm" makes more sense.

>Just finished reading "The Ashes Of Eden" by William Shatner and ran
>across some Hol that I'd like the Grammerians to comment on.

Read it a year or two ago.  I wouldn't go so far as to call what's in it
"Hol", but it was obviously written by someone who knew which direction of
TKD to hold facing up.

>From:
>Star Trek
>The Ashes of Eden
>by William Shatner
>Pocket Books Publishing

>(paperback)
>ISBN 0-671-52036-9

>p16
><...hut...chorgh...soch...> 9... 8...7
><...jav...vagh...>   6...5

Right, countdown, modulo capitalization.

>p36
><Chalchaj 'qmey>  Children of Heaven (per the book)
>	     chal (n) - sky (heaven??)
>	     chaj (NS4) - their
>	     'q (N?) - ???? (short for <puq>??) **********
>	      mey (NS2) - plural gen

My guess: An attempt for "Heaven's children."  The -chaj at the end seems
to be pretty common among beginners in possessive constructions when it's
incorrect ("the Humans' books" becomes "*Humanpu' puqchaj"; this is
actually on the other noun; whatever).  If the writers were any better at
their Klingon, I could really like "'qmey" for "children", taking the ' as
not the Klingon consonant but the English mark of elision (maybe better
written as - in this case, to avoid confusion), under the theory that
"puqmey" became worn down to the (non-Klingon-sounding) "qmey" over the
years.

>p188
><QIghpej> Klingon agonizer

Canon.

>p221
><chalwutlh> the underworld
>	       chal (n) - sky (heaven??)
>	       wutlh (n) - underground

Interesting.

><chalchaj> heaven
>	     chal (n) - sky (heaven??)
>	     chaj (NS4) - their

No answer.

><Chal> the name of the planet

>p292
><QIH poj> damage analysis

Understandable.

>Query:
>Interesting use of <chalwutlh>. Is this valid? What about *<'qmey>?? Is
>this valid or did the publishers (typesetters) mess up? Wouldn't <chalchaj
>'qmey> realy be "Children of their heaven"?? or should *<chalchaj 'qmey>
>realy be *<chalchaj puqmey> ??

See above.

~mark




Back to archive top level