tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 20 20:45:24 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New Words Correction
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: New Words Correction
- Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2002 20:45:12 EST
In a message dated 2/18/2002 12:49:06 PM Mountain Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
> There's this Klingon animal, you see, which is kind of
> bull-like. It's called a {tangqa'}. Both male and female ones are called
> {tangqa'}. So it doesn't really mean 'bull.' But it certainly looks like
> one. Or more like a bull than anything else."
>
>
jImIStaH. Is a tangqa' an animal of both genders, either gender, or possibly
no gender but still more resembling a bull than anything else we can
describe?
By analysis of Maltz' explanation, I see clearly that both male and female
ones (tangqa') exist. I believe that this says male ones exist and female
ones exist. I do not believe this says that male gender and female gender
are embodied in one tangqa'.
"Or more like a bull than [like] anything else" means to me that it looks
more like a bull than like a Qogh or 'er, etc., not just more like a bull
than a cow. The key word in this analysis is "anything."
I'm not making any final, concrete declarations here. I'm only purporting my
analysis. True, it is biased by what I thought automatically when I first
read Maltz' words.
peHruS