tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 14 15:12:52 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: anatomical reference
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: anatomical reference
- Date: Thu, 14 Aug 97 18:55:20 UT
[email protected] on behalf of Guido wrote:
> I hope I don't sound too hoity-toity, BUT the original meaning of 'o', by
> TKD, is nautical/aviational. The people that used it as a locational, as
> counterpart to 'et, were admittedly stretching it. After all, can everything
> be said to have a "fore" and "aft", except metaphorically (people, animals,
> houses)? It probably doesn't belong in ranks with words like retlh and Dung,
> but it has been employed there infrequently (*sheepish grin*).
And now we have {tlhop} "area in front of" and {'em} "area behind," though
these seem to refer, as do {Dung} and {bIng}, to the spaces just beyond the
given object, not part of the object.
> Maybe we should really talk to Okrand, who blessed us with ngech as
> cleavage, because who knew Klingons thought so *geographically* about such
> things. :-)
Please note that although both {'I'} and {nughI'} have made it into KGT, the
further definition of {ngech} is NOT in it. (Gee, wonder why . . . ?)
--
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97620.2