tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 12 15:08:35 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: mangpu' or negh?
- From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: mangpu' or negh?
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:08:24 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=i+/7jThH0H5QaEhYQAVoMRhnlq0KYFJCoK6Pt9rLnN2bwtV0zjfb8pf+3T84IBo6mg3dWByXDpqS3EAwd+XJLXcwfXMCC1VH1ZnKy8bm3vIxIGpOylwKOzYgV0W9bAD5IwPhHUhOp9EUTPEOKt4WqNDaYRdohHYVNTAymUhRvgU= ;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
and we can't predict how they wouldn't understand them... Considering it's a vocal language, it's safe to say that if it wasn't for how we write/type the words suffixes might be considered as separate words, but when written, attatched to their words so it's easier to learn rather than a word with double meaning.
Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
My point was that not being native speakers, we can't predict what native
speakers would understand them as. If anything. Without context I would
probably understand *{be''a'} and *{loD'a'} as "giant" and
"giantess". Klingons might well consider these neologisms as gibberish,
saying {nuqjatlh?}
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1¢/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.