tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 22 20:05:06 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC (Qun)
- From: Joel Anderson <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC (Qun)
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 20:04:47 -0800 (PST)
>>"joH'a'" still seems reasonable, in the context of the Biblical usage,
>>particularly Hebrew scriptures, considering that the tetragrammaton in
>>Hebrew scriptures is not a generic term like "god", but a name, usually
>>translated as LORD in English translations.
>
>Not only in translations -- it's pronounced as "our lord" in Hebrew as
>well....
Well, yes - and in practice it was *tagged* in Hebrew to be read that way by supplying the vowels (once they became standard practice in the text)for "adonai", subsequently misread and turned into "jehovah" by some monk.
That is (back to tlhIngan) another reason I like the mu' "joH'a'" for the Almighty. In my mnemonics addled mind joH'a' is reminiscent of Jehovah.
==
*** Joel Anderson * http://www.MrKlingon.org *****
** QI'tu' Holmey ghot Holmey je vIlo'chugh, **
**'ach parmaq vIghajbe'chugh, vaj jIchuSchoHqu'**
_____________________________________________________________
Sign up for FREE email from MrKlingon.org at http://www.MrKlingon.org
Why NOT say it in Klingon?