tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 15 08:02:13 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

re: More questions (was Re: *Paramount* chaw')

> From: Qov <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 21:27:36 -0700
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>> Here's a question for everyone: One area I am quite unsure about is the
> area
>> of -wI' nouns and how one should translate them. Is <<ngaQbe'wI'>> good
>> grammar for use as "key"?
>
> ngaQ means "be locked"
> Therefore ngaQwI' means 'a thing that is locked' or 'the locked one.'
> ngaQbe'wI' is 'the unlocked one'.
> e.g.
> ngaQbe'wI' vISampa',  Soch lojmIt vIpoSmoH 'e' vInID.
> "I tried to open seven doors, before I found the one that wasn't locked."

Ahhh, but is the unlocked door the 7th one or the 8th one? Your Klingon and 
English versions are equally ambiguous.

> When I want to refer to a device that causes things to become unlocked,
> usually it's that bit of plastic they give you in hotels these days, at
> qep'a', I say ngaQHa'moHwI'  literally something like "delockedifier"  --
> 'object (or person) that causes to invert the sate of being locked.'  If I
> wanted a key in order to lock something, I'd ask for a ngaQmoHwI' -
> lockedmaker.

Then again, is it that the lock is locked, or is it that the lock causes 
the door to be locked?

Perhaps we might step back from our fascination with making nouns out of 
verbs here and approach the problem centered on verbs as verbs:

chorgh lojmIt vIpoSmoH 'e' vInID 'ach poSchoH lojmIt chorghDIch neH. ngaQ 
Hoch latlhmey.

I'd call a key a {ngaQHa'moHmeH jan}. Combination locks, however, require a 
{ngaQHa'meH ngoq}. These terms may be less succinct, but I think they are 
clearer in their meaning. Since I believe that a lock causes a door to be 
locked, I'd argue that a {ngaQmoHmeH jan} is a lock and a {ngaQHa'moHmeH 
jan} is the key. Think about it. If you are determined to want a key in 
order to lock a door, I'd call it a {ngaQmoHmeH jan chu'wI'}.

But all of this is just opinion, since we don't really have words for lock, 
key, etc. The question becomes whether or not a person not privy to our 
explanations would understand each of these terms taken from the existing 
vocabulary and stretched to meet the meaning that we intend.

>> And for that matter, how about <<ngaQwI'>> for
>> "lock" (a noun)?
>
> In that sense, sure, ngaQwI' might refer to a lock.  After all, a lock is
> a thing that is locked.  Of course, by that logic "locker" in English
> should mean 'lock' not 'secure closet'.
>
> My point is, we don't know absolutely what Klingons call things, but we
> can acurately describe them using correct grammar.

Agreed.

>> As well, in Klingon for the Galactic Traveller Dr Okrand
>> gives a word for lava (vaHbo'). Further to that, is there a word for
>> volcano? Or for other geological events?
>
> Look up Seq, Qom, and Qargh.  I'd say vaHbo' lIngbogh HuD if I needed to
> describe a Hawaiian volcano.
> Qov

majQa', 'ach SoHvaD qubbe' ghu'vam.

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level