Re: To Have and Have Not

[Angghal@aol.com]

ghItlh voragh :

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

>Normally, I'd agree with you if we didn't have {pIch vIghajbe'} from TKD.  
>Perhaps {De'} "information", {quv} "honor" and {pIch} "fault, blame" are 
"semi-
>tangible".  You can have or possess {ghaj} them or you can lack {Hutlh} 
them.
>The secrecy proverb might just be metaphorical but even so, if {ghaj} is 
only used 
>with tangible objects - like stars (theoretically!) - it's still a bit odd 
that Klingons 
>would say that the day has/possesses secrets.  Can you grasp a secret?

The line from TKD is sticky, I admit. The proverbs from TKW are, well, 
proverbs. Many of them are metaphorical (or at least figurative), and as a 
consequence of being proverbs may reflect a frozen style.

But {pIch vIghajbe'} from TKD is a problem. Given the emphasis placed upon 
honor and the consequences associated with its absence, I'm reluctant to pin 
the weight of all nontangible objects of {ghaj} on a word like "blame."

Which is frustrating, I admit.

Let me toss this out to the list. I raised this flag in response to the 
sentence Guido's phrase:

DIch vIghajbe'
I don't have certainty.

Would the use of {Sov} instead of {ghaj} feel better or worse to your Klingon 
ear? 

Just mulling it over.

Lawrence