tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 19 15:41:42 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Wild nature

>At 11:23 AM 7/19/99 -0500, DloraH wrote:
>>>> I had a question concerning nature. Since civilization is an
>>>> artificial habitat. Would uncivilized also be considered wild.
>>>> With the diminutive of wild being natural. Both are are
>>>> considered adjectives or minor verbs. Though there
>>>> are derivatives for nouns as in wilderness and nature.
>>>The question you are asking - how to say "wild" or "natural" - is a fairly
>>>difficult one. We don't have a single word with a meaning even close to
>>>either of these. One word to consider is <nIt> - "pure, unsullied,
>>>uncorrupted" - found in KGT. Perhaps we simply don't know the vocabulary
>>>that deals with these concepts yet. Perhaps Klingons basically consider
>>>*all* forests and animals (except maybe pets <Sajmey>) to be "wild", and
>>>don't feel a need to comment on it.
>I seem to recall in KGT something about hunting "forest sarks", and their
>status as "forest" animals was supposed to imply wildness. I think it
>was in the Foods section, but I don't have KGT here to check.

I got my copy of KGT; there are a couple of possibilities.
On p. 89, fruits and vegetables are divided into
{Du' naH} "farm produce" and {naH tlhab} "wild/free vegetables".
On p. 111, we do indeed find the {ngem Sargh}, for a sark found
in the wild, "usually one that has never carried a Klingon
around." (i.e., undomesticated.

-- ter'eS

Back to archive top level