tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 01 10:07:56 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "Praxis"
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: "Praxis"
- Date: Thu, 1 May 1997 13:08:01 -0400 (EDT)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message fromMarian Schwartz on Sat, 26 Apr 1997 14:34:43 -0700 (PDT))
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 14:34:43 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
>
> "Praxis" ghItlhmeH chay' tlhIngan Hol lo'lu'? "pIraQIS?"
chaq. Though (a) you just can't trust those Paramount writers and their
(non-)understanding of Klingon phonology and (b) I like to avoid getting
formulaic in transliterations. That's how it works in real languages too;
not everything is transliterated by the same people, and certainly not in
the same ways, and people hear foreign sounds differently. For example, I
always think of Grilka, Quark's snugglemuffin (used for incongruity value
as applied to a Klingon) as "ghIlqa(')" (not "ghIrIlqa'" or something).
After all, to some people, "gh" is an "r" (a French "r") or a cross between
g and r. I could imagine Praxis as "pa(')QIS" (glottal stops you can
almost never be sure about), heard by someone not quite expecting the
overly strong aspiration that particular speaker happened to give the "p".
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBM2jN7MppGeTJXWZ9AQEyZAMAkWM4lQ5GI3DGg8hEAk9dxP3XpcA5xIHG
zTVcZFhHt2yii8DjOjZ9zRHIEDRal7rb1o6L0hwiqTVamVnjOYvLzijfNsEcRGCS
DrBPGG82UXj5MKo+Wxmo2mKYGKTMgV0t
=xVAC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----