tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 17 10:40:48 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: More proverbs
Voragh:
>> yab'e' lughojmoHlu'bogh magh qech lajnISbe'bogh qellaHghach.
De'vID:
> Did you mean another word, or is this an additional meaning of
> {magh}? I looked through my sources and can't find this meaning
> of {magh} "betray", where is it defined as "indicate, reveal"?
ghunchu'wI':
: I never saw it, but I'm told that it appeared that way on Paramount's
: official MSN-hosted Klingon Linguistics web site. Apparently, some
: inquiries were made and it was determined that the webmasters "embellished"
: some of the definitions, making some inappropriate assumptions in the
: process.
Star Trek Continuum webmasters embellished the definitions, not the one or two
word English glosses. As I understand it, those glosses were supplied by
Okrand, along with sound files of Okrand pronouncing the word as well as an
occasional conjugated example verb (e.g. jIlaD, cholegh, etc.), also with a
sound file. We have an example of such an STC embellished definition for
{magh} "betray" in fact:
"Verb, to commit treason." (MSN)
I agree that the fact that Okrand didn't include the gloss "indicate, reveal"
in KGT is suspicious, but I don't think it's grounds to toss out the word
entirely. We do have other examples of homonyms: e.g. {chu'} which means
variously 1. play (a musical instrument); 2. be new; 3. engage, activate (a
device), turn on; 4. clearly, perfectly, (absolutely) properly, well (as Type 6
suffix).
OTOH... STC's entry for {magh} may simply have been a typo for {'agh} "show,
demonstrate, display" with "indicate, reveal" being Okrand's own extensions.
If so, then I can re-write my translation of Aristotle as:
yab'e' lughojmoHlu'bogh 'agh qech lajnISbe'bogh qellaHghach.
BTW, is the listing for {magh} still present on Star Trek: Continuum, in the
Klingon Linguistic Studies area? (I'm at work and don't have access to the web
other than email at the moment.)
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons