tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Dec 12 16:12:09 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [KLBC] wo' mung
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: [KLBC] wo' mung
- Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 16:12:58 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
Phil writes - and very quickly, too:
> Just one comment... how was I suppose that profanity had a special
> place in the TKD and that I had to look at the end of section 5.5
> to get it ? Well now I know.
No, you weren't expected to know that it was there. I'm trying to
give you enough information to determine what might or might not be a
Klingon word and to be able to pinpoint what you don't know. If I
succeed in explaining this, no one will waste time trying to find the
meaning of the particle {y} or the word {mjaj} because they will
understand that that is not the way Klingon words are carved up.
> I don't think it's my fault if the klingon-english list
> removes words because the traduction is '*@$%'.
No, not your fault. Not your fault that you cannot yet instictively
parse Klingon words into syllables, either. At the moment it is your
biggest barrier to understanding. I expect that some of the BGs had
to look twice at a couple of the parsing examples I gave you below.
They aren't trivial. Because you pick this up very quickly, and
you're keen to learn I'm pushing you. Am I pushing you into
frustration? I'm trying to push you OUT of frustration. :-/
> tIqel -> you take them into account
maj. I'd say "take them into account!" - an order, because it is an
imperative prefix.
> ghomaj ?> you good us ???
> good isn't a verb so I don't get that one
You're right that the word is not a verb. But it's a valid word. Try
again.
> ghomjaj X> no idea what mjaj is
{*mjaj} starts with two consonants in a row. One of the points I
want you to realize is that that can't be right.
Remember this: no Klingon syllable we have ever seen starts with two
consonants in a row.
Try again.
> ghomagh -> you betray us
qar. Remember that it is an imperative, perhaps better translated as
"betray us!"
> ghom'egh -> > he meets himself (I hope he's in front of a mirror)
maj.
> ghmegh X> > impossible
Why?
> lulIghmeH -> he rides you for
Correctly parsed, as {lu-} + {lIgh} + {-meH} but a bit of trouble
translating. Should be, "for them to ride it." The prefix {lu-}
indicates a plural subject with a singualar object, and the suffix
{-meH} means "for" as in "in order to."
> lulIghmaj -> our refuge
majQa'
> nIgheghmoH -> since they're roughing you
That would be {nIgheghmo'}, if that made any sense. Well parsed, but
a lookup error. The suffix {-moH} is "cause." "They're making you
rough.
> nIghmoH X> impossible
Why?
> ral'choH -> he's starting to be violent
There is an extraneous {'} in this word that does not belong
to either syllable. This one is nonsense. An impossible
word. {*ral'choH} is as far from {ralchoH} as {*raltlhchoH} or
{*ralghchoH} would be.
> maw'choH -> he's sarting to be crazy
maj.
> maw'egh ?> he's crazy himself (doesn't make sens to me) >
I put this one in for the same reason as {*ral'choH} -- to make you
watch where the {'} letter goes. This word does not have the same
syllable boundary as the one above. Try again.
> DuSaQmey X> impossible, can't use mey with a verb DuSaQmoH -> he >
> cause you to cry
Well reasoned, but not impossible. Try again.
It's ok on these to say "this could be this word I've never heard of,
plus this suffix" or it's this word and these suffixes, but I don't
know what it means together. All I'm trying to do is get you to
recognize where the possible syllable boundaries are in a Klingon
word. I want you to know what to look up.
Let me see if I can articulate some parsing rules. These are purely
empirical.
1. Every syllable begins with exactly one consonant followed by a
vowel. (Sounds like {gh} {tlh} {ch} count as one consonant each.)
This means that a syllable never begins with two or more
consonants and never begins with a vowel.
2. The only pairs of consonants that occur at the end of syllables
are {rgh} {y'} and {w'}.
3. Letters are not dropped if doubled, or if hard to say next to one
another. {chaw'} + {'egh} = {chaw''egh} NOT {*chaw'egh}. (Nitpickers
can think of one exception to this rule, but let's not confuse the
issue).
(Note that {'} is a consonant and {y} and {w} count as a consonant,
for the purpose of the above rules.)
Sometimes there is more than one legal way to parse a word:
Find TWO meanings for {Dabej}.
- Qov
Robyn Stewart [email protected]
NLK Technical Library ph. (604) 689-0344 fax (604) 443-1000
NLK Consultants Inc. 855 Homer Street, Vancouver BC V6B 5S2