tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 23 23:21:56 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: {qon} vs {gher}

ngabwI' ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dar'Qang" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 1:32 AM
Subject: Re: {qon} vs {gher}

> The struggle for me is that by the description of {gher}, a news wire
> report would seem to be a {gher}.  But that seems to erode the nifty idea
> that Qov / MO were describing about the Klingon view of composition being
> encountering the song/poem "out there" and then recording it. (because the
> latter seems somewhat like {gher} now.)

Agreed, and what's helping me with this is the idea that perhaps {qon} is a
more "literary" version of {gher}.

I would describe the work of a novelist as {qon}, and a grocery list as
being {gher}'ed.

If it was an awful, unoriginal, boring book, I would say {paqvam gher} "He
compiled the book", to be deliberately insulting. If the grocery list was
poorly scrawled riddled with misspellings, I would still call it {gher}.

If it was a *great* novel, , I would say {paq qonchu'} "She recorded the
book perfectly", to be deliberately compplimentary, but a grocery list done
as a love poem in iambic pentameter would be, at best {qon}'ed. {qonchu'}
would be a bit much to me.

I'm thinking of it as a statement of the originality, the "literariness", if
you will, of the work, and where it's coming from.

--ngabwI'
Beginners' Grammarian
Klingon Language Institute
http://kli.org
HovpoH 701952.8

Back to archive top level