tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 17 18:20:27 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: gauntlets (was: another new-to-the-list person's question)

> Points of similarity include:
> 1. Emphasis on verbs, vice nouns

If you look at the Klingon way of life you will see that it is very
eventful and based around actions rather than words. This accounts for the
emphasis on verbs. You don't just have a "red chair" in Klingon, you have a
<quS Doq>! The chair isn't sitting around, and just happens to be red; it
*is* red! That is what it does! These kinds of things don't happen by
accident you know! ;) Just look at the fact that Klingons don't scuttle
around the issues, they say what they mean, and more importantly, they mean
what they say.

> 2. Heavy usage of suffixes and prefixes as modifiers, and to show tones
> emphasis,

Klingons don't need all sorts of special words: their verbs do just fine.
Once again, the verb is the main part of Klingon speech, and of Klingon

> 3. Compounding of simple nouns to create awkward-sounding complex nouns
> the anglo-phone ear; cf japanese "mouth speaking tens" for english

Yeah, there aren't many nouns are there? The Klingons would rather describe
an object by what it does than give it a cryptic name. After all, a rose by
any other name would smell as sweet! So, Klingons would rather call
something by a name which has no alternate interpretation ("flower" is
actually, "tainted leaves" in Klingon.) Once again, the verbs are the key. 

> Might I be too far afield, then, if I were to speculate that the cryptic
> mentioned on a certain pair of gaunlets might be pictographic in origin,
> even a stylized or phonetic pictograph? If the gauntlets were of ancient
> origin one might even speculate that they represented an archaic and
> link in the development of Klingon written language.

As long as we're still in the realm of fantasy, sure.  ;)

--- loD Doq

Back to archive top level