tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 20 15:53:27 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KGT: naHjej or neHjej?
On Mon, 18 Oct 1999 19:55:50 -0400 David Trimboli
<[email protected]> wrote:
> jatlh charghwI':
>
> > At this point, I'd consider either one to be correct. Both
> > exist in canon. {neHjej} can be easily found in the word
> > list, so using it is fine. Meanwhile, {naHjej} is clearly
> > the way he originally intended the word to be used, so, it
> > would be hard to call it wrong. In English, we have one
> > word spelled "blond" and another spelled "blonde". Which
> > one is right?
>
>
> When referring to a man, "blond" is correct. When referring to a woman,
> "blonde" is correct.
As I understand it, this is a direct rip-off from French, who
apparently know something about blondes. Meanwhile, apparently,
"blond" is the term that is commonly used for hair without
reference to gender or for a man with blond hair, but a woman
with blond hair is a blonde. Or at least that's how the Oxford
Encyclopedic Dictionary sees it.
> "Blond/blonde" is the only instance of adjectival gender left in English.
> (Y'know, how Spanish would have "muchacho feo" and "muchacha fea," for
> instance. The adjective has a gender-based form. Well, "blond/blonde" is
> the only English adjective which does this.)
Likely that's because it is actually French and not English.
> Note that most people do not know this distinction. Very soon, in
> language-scale, "blond/blonde" will probably settle into one form, or at
> least lose any distinction it once had. Those who do know of the two
> spellings usually don't know what they mean, anyway.
Unless they speak French.
> SuStel
> Stardate 99797.4
charghwI'