tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 26 13:24:49 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: par' vs. muS?

Shane MiQogh ([email protected]) 

>... couples (officially married and otherwise) tend to call each
>other by pet names (sometimes called endearments or hypocorisms or,
>in Klingon, {bang pongmey} ["beloveds' names"]). A {bang pong} is
>usually couple-specific - that is, the set of expressions used by
>one couple is different from that used by another couple. Pet names
>are almost never uttered unless the two members of the couple are
>alone and, therefore, are seldom known by anyone else. Indeed, one
>of the defining characteristics of a {bang pong} is that it be
>secret, known only by the two members of the couple. (KGT 199)
  One would think that such setimental things would be insulting to klingons... Though, this is one of the sweeter things that few in this world still do. I find it intresting though... Pet names..? It's hard enough trying to come up with a Klingon name without basing it on a name you already have... I'm sure there are quite a few out there that people know of by some cannon source, but it'd be intresting to get a few for those of us who don't have such cannon resources...
   
  >We do know that there is a Klingon word for "love," meaning something
>like what we mean by the word. It is {parmaq}. We heard this word for
>the first time in a recent episode of Deep Space Nine where Dax says
>that parmaq is "the Klingon word for 'love,' but with more aggressive
>overtones." She accuses Worf of having a "bad case" of {parmaq}, which
>suggests it's a noun. ... Unfortunately, so far, that's about all we
>know about the Klingon word for "love." I'll have to do some additional
>research to find out how the word is used correctly in a sentence. Since
>it's Klingon love we're talking about here, I wouldn't be surprised to
>learn that it doesn't work in at all the same way as the Federation
>Standard word "love." (msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand 12/12/96)
   
  i don't think klingons are insuseptable to usage of verbs as nouns. particularly that verb in english is often used as a noun describing the verb form. "You have a bad case of love" actually makes a little sence in english as a slang term, it may be the same for klingon, so don't completely rule it as a noun *YET*, but i don't suggest using it as a verb either.
   
  >The difference between {bang} and {parmaqqay} is unclear, but {parmaqqay} 
>appears to refer to a more overtly sexual or lustful ("aggressive" as 
>Okrand and the Paramount writers coyly put it) relationship.
   
  to me that sounds as parmaqqay would also be bang'a' or some one who you love more affectionatly than just a bang. To me, i would then assume that "bang" would be an equivalent of more of a boyfriend girlfriend thing or casual friend while parmaqqay would be a strong companion. I would (and i'm probably unwisely assuming this) that it'd be similar to the french "ami(e)" vs "copain/copine" relationship, only this is more about oposite sex relationships rather than friendships. But that's just my assumption. As perverse as the Klingons seem, i wouldn't put "aggressive" necessarily perversion, though such a relationship quite leads to that and can be used that way.
   
  >While the object of the verb is the recipient of the action,
>the indirect object may be considered the beneficiary. In a
>Klingon sentence, the indirect object precedes the object
>and is suffixed with the Type 5 noun suffix {-vaD} "for,
>intended for". The suffix may be attached to either a noun
>or a pronoun.
   
  That makes me wonder... "I have to tell Sarah what was said". Wouldn't Sarah be treated as the indirect object and put -vaD at the end of her name, or would, in this case, i just use nuq even though that would imply it's a question....?

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.

Back to archive top level