tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 14 05:03:39 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Speaking of new words...
- From: [email protected] (Bill Willmerdinger)
- Subject: Speaking of new words...
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:25:08
>> I haven't been able to come up with any decent translation of
>> "Annotated"!
>> At the moment, my "test" title page reads {Qob tlhIngan mu'ghom
>> poDHa'}. I figured that anything "unclipped" *ought* to be
>> "annotated", but that might only make sense in a backfit. Does anyone
>> have any suggestions?
> Well, I call my own AKD a {tlhIngan Hol Sachlu'bogh mu'ghom}, i.e. an
> "expanded" Klingon dictionary. I suppose you could also call it a
> {QIjlu'bogh mu'ghom}, an "explanatory" or "commented upon" dictionary
> (what Russians call a tolkovyi slovar') depending on how much extra
> material you've added to the integrated Klingon-English vocabulary
> list.
The message previous to this describes what I've done (and what I want to do).
In naming the thing, I wanted to avoid long {-bogh} clauses... because like
you, I'm never sure if I've used them correctly!
> For instance, through the wonders of cut-and-paste I've included *all*
> the relevent attestations from canon to *each* vocabulary entry,
> turning my AKD in effect into a concordance and usage guide. I've also
How did you get all the canon in? Laborious typing, or a page scanner? (That
page scanner is my *next* hardware purchase. Just let the price drop another
seventy or so bucks....)
> This is, by definition, a work-in-progress (over 3 years now) and is
> currently some 163 pages long, last time I looked.
My frist printout of my AKD has 107 pages of Klingon-to-English, 33 pages of
English-to-Klingon, and 33 pages of phoneme charts. Of course, lots of that
is blank space....
> I'm planning on attending qep'a' loSDIch and I'll bring copies and
> printouts of all my files to compare with what others have done. Maybe
> we can even have a session on Klingon lexicography!
Sounds like an ideal topic for a workshop. Lawrence? ~mark?
> As to {poD}, to me {tlhIngan Hol poD} is "Clipped Klingon" whereas
> {tlhIngan Hol poDHa'} would be more like "formal" or "standard
> Klingon", with all of the affixes in the right places and the syntax
> correct. "Unclipped" in English feels more like {poDbe'} used in a
> purely descriptive sense, for example: {poDbe' tlhIngan Hol
> mu'tlheghvam} "This Klingon sentence isn't 'clipped'."
Possibly you're right. I got into the habit of thinking of {-Ha'} as creating
"polar opposites" because of pairs such as {par}/{parHa'}, {ghom}/{ghomHa'},
and the ever popular {muS}/{muSHa'}. On the other hand, "formal" or
"Standard" Klingon *is* what most dictionaries concern themselves with.
And on the gripping hand, perhaps {poDHa'} actually means "unabridged" and the
spirit of *Danyel web'ISter* lives within me.... <g>
> Maybe someone should go ask Maltz!
I may just do that at BabelCon!
Qob la' (tlh.w.D. quttaj ra'wI')
tlhIngan Hol yejHaD qhojwI'