tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 21 11:23:00 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: HIQaH
On Thu, 19 Aug 1999 06:23:22 +0200 Christiane Scharf
<[email protected]> wrote:
> jatlh charghwI':
>
>
> >On Tue, 17 Aug 1999 12:22:22 -0500 Terrence Donnelly
> ><[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> At 10:50 AM 8/17/99 CDT, Marc wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> {lojmIt} for "door", I don't know what to call the device that
> >> >> unlocks it. I could coin {ngaQwI'} or {ngaQHa'wI'}, but then
> >> >> I've violated my design goal of using only simple canon words.
> >
> >Perhaps you have overly extended goals. If there is no simple
> >word for what you want, then you need a description of it. When
> >I've imagined this, I've considered that the lock is the ngaQwI'
> >and the key is the ngaQHa'wI' because it is the lock which locks
> >the door and it is the key that unlocks it.
>
> {ngaQ} is "be locked". The thing that locks the door would be a
> {ngaQmoHwI'}, the thing that unlocks it would be a {ngaQHa'moHwI'}.
The lock does not cause the door to be locked. The lock is
locked. The door itself is, if you really think about it, never
locked. It merely won't open. But the lock is definitely the
thing which is locked.
You do have a point about the key, however, since that is the
thing which causes the lock to be unlocked.
> >But that's just my
> >own perverse way of looking at it. I'm sure it would not work as
> >a general use of the words.
> >
> >Likely, whatever you use, you need to explicitly explain your
> >choice of words and explain why you have chosen them in the
> >absence of something better.
>
> qeSchu' charghwI'. ghu' yIDel: SoQtaH lojmIt. poSmoHlaHbe' SuvwI'.
> poSmoHlaHmeH jan le' SamnIS. janvamvaD {ngaQHa'moHwI'} (maybe even the
> simpler {SoQHa'moHwI'}?) ponglu'. baS naQHey mach 'oH.
mIwlIj vIparHa', 'ach Hoch *parenthetical suggestion*meylIj
vIpar. ghaytanHa' naQHey 'oH.
> >> >if this isn't a mediaval kind of setting, you could have the
> >> >door's computer scan the permit of the adventurer. slight problem(?)
> >>
> >> Do'Ha'; it _is_ a "medieval" setting (or anyway, a pre-technological
> >> phase of Klingon history).
> >
> >Don't assume that medieval technology isn't technology. A
> >stone-headed bludgeon counts as technology. Technology existed
> >long before electronics.
>
> Since ter'eS wants simple vocab, I cannot recomend that the hero should just
> get an 'obmaQ, avoiding annoying key problems... Maybe s/he could use a
> fallen Sor as a rammer... Hmmm, if s/he is an experienced burglar, a bended
> mavjop would probably do the job, too, though it might be surprising to find
> a paper clip in a "medieval" setting. And I wouldn't call "paper clip" one
> of the basic words... Or try the little chemist's method (as once used by
> qerq HoD): find some useful tlhIlmey, maybe ngat, and some kind of ngaSwI'
> to construct a jorwI' and BOOM! Or get two sticks of Sor Hap, rub them at
> each other until a qul starts to meQ, take a burning Sech and set the door
> on fire. And last, but not least, for the hero with absolutely no technical
> skills, the find-the-guard-and-force-him-to-open-the-door-method: 'avwI' Sam
> SuvwI'. lojmIt poSmoH 'avwI' 'e' raD SuvwI'. lojmIt poSmoHta'DI' 'avwI',
> 'avwI' HoH SuvwI'. (That's the one with the simplest vocab, I think)
Be creative.
> >
> >> -- ter'eS
> >>
> >
> >charghwI'
> >
>
> HovqIj
charghwI' 'utlh