tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 22 14:15:53 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

To Have and Have Not (was "qel" yIqel )

ghItlh ghuy'Do wa':

>I'm not exactly sure, but that is an interesting topic, 
>and we should talkabout it at some point.
>DIch vIghajbe', 'ach Dajqu' qechvetlh, 'ej tugh wIqelnIS. {{:-)

The first phrase here raises a red flag for me.

"Have" is one those verbs (like "do" and "make") which so often take on extra 
duty in a language, but by no means all languages. Do we have canonical 
examples of Klingons "possessing" abstractions, or are all canon uses of 
{ghaj} limited to things one could grasp or hold or take ownership of? 

We've come at this before in Klingon, if I recall correctly (and I'm sure 
several people will leap forward if I don't), in the instance of attributing 
age to someone. English and of course other languages use "be" for this (I am 
42 years old). Spanish and other languages use "have" (tengo cuarenta y dos 

My preference is to be more conservative with Klingon and not prescribe 
non-literal uses to verbs (like {ghaj}) unless I'm clearly speaking 


Back to archive top level