tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 23 10:09:47 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: language-using suffixes vs. personal pronouns
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Philip Newton wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 09:24:18 EDT, [email protected]
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> > If I use {-wI'} on a noun referring to some thing I'm pointing at, must I use
> > {ghaH} to correctly refer to it in speech? Or is {'oH} acceptable? (This
> > question is prompted by taD's cartoon in QQ4.)
>
> An interesting question, given what TKD says on {chaH} vs {bIH} and
> does not say on {ghaH} vs {'oH}.
The definition of /'oH/ is "it", and /ghaH/ is "he, she" (TKD). There is
a specific entry about /chaH/ vs. /bIH/ because they are both defined as
"they, them"; the English doesn't not distinguish gender (or lack thereof)
in its plural pronouns.
The Conversational Klingon audio program says this:
"He, or she... ghaH. ghaH.
It. 'oH. 'oH.
...
They, referring to beings... chaH. chaH.
And finally, "they", referring to things... bIH. bIH."
There is definitely a difference between "beings capable of language" and
"objects with gender". Although, I think the intent is to distinguish
between "people" (of any species) and "animals". Although we might refer
to, say, our pet cat as "he" or "she", Klingons would not.
I would say, given all the other evidence, I'd be fairly certain that if
you were looking at a "thing", it would always be /'oH/. If you were
looking at a person, it would be /ghaH/. Although the English text in the
TKD and even in CK is definitely not that completely defined, it's also
not inconsistent in how this concept is handled.
...Paul
** Have a question that reality just can't answer? **
** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
The frogurt is also cursed.
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}