tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 21 11:17:01 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
FW: Pronunciation [was RE: K'Zhen Zu-Merz]
- From: "qe'San" <[email protected]>
- Subject: FW: Pronunciation [was RE: K'Zhen Zu-Merz]
- Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 19:19:16 -0000
- Importance: Normal
Firstly I do not want to say that Vowel-w or Vowel-y combinations should
ever preceed any other character than {'}.. My name is just that my name
and was discardedfrom this discussion.
Secondly I am not trying to imply that usage should be other than as
described in accepted canon reference materials.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Anderson [mailto:[email protected]]
>
>
> >> ..."w" and "y"...do *not* create dipthongs in Klingon.
>
> ja' qe'San:
> >BUT YES! THEY DO. TKD defines them as diphthongs (explained
> further below).
What I meant is that vowel-w and vowel-y combinations are described and
pronunced as diphtongs even though the printed characters maynot be.
> The only thing I see in TKD which involves diphthong-like
> ideas is when the
> {ew} and {Iw} combinations are singled out for special
> explanation. TKD
> says the sounds may be *approximated* by running together two
> vowel sounds.
> It never says that {w} or {y} actually have vowel sounds or behave as
> vowels.
>
Ok you're correct it doesn't say {w} or {y} have vowel sounds.
However, when it says {ew}, {Iw} sounds approximately like klingon {eu} and
{Iu} respectively it doesn't take a lot to realise apart from the fact that
the sounds are diphthongs that the Klingon {w} after the {e} is vocally
being represented by the Klingon {u}
Agreed sounding "approximately like" isn't sounding "actually like". But
are you saying that when MO says approximate he means SO approximately like
a vowel that in fact its a consonant sound and if so, how? Consonant and
Vowel sounds are about where and how a sound is produced. It has nothing to
do with the character used to represent it. I'm not aware of anything that
says if the whole vowel sound is pronounced before running into the second
vowel "sound" that this is not a diphthong. It doesn't even have to move
all the way to the other vowel sound.. Just moving away from one towards
another is sufficient for the result to be a diphthong. I can't see that it
would even matter if the culture or language creating/using it knows what a
diphthong is.
> >> In each
> >> case explained on pages 16 and 17 of TKD, the vowel sound
> >> does not change when the consonant {w} or {y} follows it.
> >>
Who said it did? I didn't!! I agree that the part of the sound represented
by the preceeding vowel does not change and is pronounced as described for
that character...But the sound does not stop there. It runs into the sound
represented by the folowing {w} or {y} consonant character... The sound of
this character for which the nearest approximation, given by MO in this
arrangement, is a vowel sound. In other words the initial vowel sound runs
into another vowel sound (not character) and therefore forms a Diphthong.
> >
> >Pages 16-17 states the vowel sound DOES CHANGE.
>
> Try reading it again, pretending that you agree with me. You might
> discover that it says merely that the sound might not be the
> same sound
> expected from the English spelling. If you're interpreting
> it as saying
> that {ay} *changes* from rhyming with "day" to rhyming with
> "die", your
> reading is quite wrong.
I can't even see how these are close day rhymes with words like Hay but die
rhymes with words like sly.
> The Klingon vowel represented by the
> symbol {a}
> *always* has the same sound, no matter what letter follows it. (For
> nit-pickers, there are of course slight variations in the
> sound, but the
> "vowel sound" itself is the same.)
I agree and have never meant to imply anything else.
>
> [If you're planning to say something about {w} having different sounds
> depending on whether it comes at the beginning or end of a
> syllable, note
Only as described by MO on pages 16-17 of TKD as in the sound is similar to
the Klingon {u}. If thats what I've got wrong please explain.
> that {l} and {r} often change their sound in the same way. A
> simple and
> consistent Klingon phonological theory doesn't treat {r} as a
> vowel, and it
> doesn't treat {w} as one either.]
I agree about r and that w is never a vowel except that when following a
vowel it takes on a similar sound to that of the KLingon {u} and therefore a
vowel sound (even if not exactly a u) it is still formed in the mouth as a
vowel.
>
> >> The simplest usable theory of Klingon phonology does not
> include the
> >> concept of dipthongs,
> >
> >YES IT DOES, It may not include the word but on Pages 16 -17
> it clearly
> >embraces the concept and states that tlhIngan Hol has
> Diphthongs. As said
> >it may not mention that word but it does supply the
> definition, "Klingon ew
> >resembles nothing in English, but can be approximated by
> running Klingon e
> >and u together." A DIPHTHONG IS IT NOT?!
>
> The *approximation* is perhaps a diphthong. The *true*
> sound, being merely
> the Klingon vowel {e} followed by the Klingon consonant {w}, is not.
Not written I agree. But a diphthong is about how the sound is made not the
way it is written.
>
> Again, the simplest description of Klingon syllable patterns
> ignores the
> concept of diphthongs entirely. It's certainly possible to
> use a theory
> which includes them, but such a theory is significantly more
> complicated
> than one which does not.
And because a theory is more complicated means its wrong? surely that is not
true.
There will always be simple versions of any theory but it doesn't mean that
anything outside the simple theory is nolonger true.
> [And by lending credibility to
> diphthongs, it
> leads to people trying to justify "words" like {*'ayS} and {*QIym}.]
Why? We can't create words. Only MO can do that. I'm not trying to clarify
anything more than the diphthong definition supplied in TKD.. My name may be
confusing things here but I accept it is no more than that and certainly not
canon. It had just been associated with the CVC rule and someone said it
was CVCC I then said I thought it was CDC. Or had meant to.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
>
qe'San