tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 18 17:16:59 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: help me explain
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: help me explain
- Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 20:16:44 EDT
jatlh DloraH:
>(c = consonant, v = vowel)
>A klingon syllable is: [ cvc ], or [ cv ], and a few special
>exceptions of [ cvcc ].
qarchu'wI' bopoQchugh,
/tlhIngan-Hol/1999/August/msg00401.html
yISuch.
If you want a more thorough explanation, see
/tlhIngan-Hol/1999/August/msg00401.html
jatlh malqa:
>I"m trying to explain to others
>why it is incorrect in *tlhIngan Hol* to write their name with
>the format of *any consenent + ' * such as K'.......,etc .And that
>B'Elanna is actually incorrect , it would be written correctly in tlhIngan
>Hol as be'elanna
jIjatlh:
>You're talking about two different styles of transliteration here. One
>is the tlhIngan Hol everyone on this mailing list understands and
>accepts. Another is the style that the Star Trek writers prefer. This
>latter style ignores tlhIngan Hol completely, making a bunch of foreign-
>sounding words (but not too foreign) with English capitalization plus a
>bunch of apostrophes sprinkled in. {qempeq}, for example, is an actual
>tlhIngan Hol name. K'mpec is how Paramount renders it. It is not
>tlhIngan Hol, but it is not necessarily wrong.
jang malqa:
>I don't believe that there are 2 *styles.* There is only one *correct* way
>to write tlhIngan Hol. I don't accept Paramount Hol.
That's OK; no well-informed person accepts Paramount Hol. :-) Even so,
we certainly are talking about two different styles here. You may argue
that one's right and one's wrong, but they're still styles. Rereading
your original message, I find that you were speaking exclusively about
tlhIngan Hol, and "B'Elanna" is certainly not tlhIngan Hol. In that
sense, you are indubitably correct.
DujHoD