tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 22 09:05:05 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: meqleH (again)
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: meqleH (again)
- Date: Sat, 22 Jan 2000 09:03:52 -0800
At 12:26 00-01-22 +0100, Jeroen wrote:
}On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, William H. Martin wrote:
}
}> You've leapt from that observation to confidence in the
}> statement that the term betleH is a corruption of the term
}> batlh 'etlh. Now, you encounter meqleH and make the even
}> greater leap of faith that it has a similar origin.
}
}It's the other way around, as stated in Klingon for the Galactic
}Traveller.
}
}> Frankly, you waste your time worrying about this. We have
}> two perfectly fine words here and we know what they mean.
}>
}> Who needs to know more and why?
}
}I do know why I'm asking this question. I'm cuurently doing an exam on
}Klingons. There's only one question I can't answer : "What is the meaning
}of the word meqleH?". You see why I need to know?
Describing the meqleH weapon, and discuss the similarity of meqleH to the
word betleH. Point out the debated etymology of betleH. Acknowledge that
while the words could have a common, similar origin, that there are many
possible etymologies and they could also have converged in sound from
divergent origins.
Name the writers of the Star Trek episode in which the word as first used,
name the actors who said (and possibly corrupted what was given them in the
script) the word in the first episode that used it, and name Mark Okrand as
the creator of the language and the final arbiter of Klingon words.
If that doesn't get you full marks, then I don't know what will.
Qov 'utlh