tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Sep 22 18:43:27 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: puchpa'?

McArdle ([email protected]) 

--- QeS 'utlh <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> ghItlhpu' lay'SIv:
> >{puchpa'qoq}
> 
> I agree with Quvar. Successful translation of
> {puchpa'qoq} obviously depends upon the fact that
> U.S. English often uses the word "bathroom" when it
> means "toilet room". If a room doesn't contain a
> {puch}, then I don't think you can call it a
> {puchpa'} of any sort, even a {puchpa'qoq}. I'd go
> with SuStel and use {Say'moHmeH pa'} or a variation
> of it (since one almost always cleans oneself in a
> bathroom, my first instinct was for {Say''eghmoHmeH
> pa'}).
> 

{puchpaqoq'} does suffer from the disability that it
requires someone to have previously called the room a
{puchpa'}.  But is this necessarily an English
speaker?  Is it really impossible for Klingon to call
a room a {puchpa'} if it contains no {puch}?
 
Consider:  you might as easily say "If a room doesn't
contain bathing facilities, then I don't think you can
call it a bathroom."  Yet this happens, and passes
without comment, in American English.  Is Klingon
necessarily a more logical language than English?

You could argue that English uses "bathroom" instead
of "toilet" only because of a taboo on mentions of
excretory functions.  True enough, but who's to say
that the Klingon distaste for washing isn't as strong
as ours for excreting?  (Cf. Voragh's post on
canonical references to bathing).  Perhaps the
semantic evolution of {puchpa'} is the exact reverse
of that of "bathroom":  Klingon came to use {puchpa'}
for bathing facilities because Klingons couldn't bring
themselves to mention bathing in (what passes on
Qo'noS for) "polite company".  It is a thing they do
not speak of.

Of course, if {puchpa'} can mean "toilet-free
bathroom", then {puchpa'qoq} is as unnecessary as
"so-called bathroom" would be in English for a room
with only a toilet and sink.  It just wouldn't occur
to a native speaker, at least under normal
circumstances (I can imagine its appearing in an
academic setting, but not in everyday speech).

My take on this would be that we don't know enough
about the semantic evolution of the Klingon language
to rule out the possibility that {puchpa'} could be
used euphemistically for a {puch}-free room.  Or, for
that matter, to rule it in.  Canon is, as far as I
know, silent on the matter.  

Do we have evidence for or against the proposition
that Klingons use euphemisms?  It would be interesting
to know.  The evidence I'm aware of cuts both ways. 
We know (and KGT confirms) that Klingons "never us[e]
an indirect expression when a blunt one will do."  On
the other hand, KGT is at pains to stress that there
are expressions so insulting that to utter them is
certain death ("Mistakes of this kind are simply not
tolerated and there are no recorded instances of
anyone living long enough to repeat the offense."  And
this is addressed to non-native speakers from whom
errors can reasonably be expected.  How much more
offensive such things must be from fellow Klingons who
can be presumed to mean what they say!)  Perhaps
implying that someone needs a bath - or, perhaps
worse, might actually be interested in bathing - is
one of these intolerable utterances.

Hoch Savan

mI'qey

P.S.  Interestingly, "toilet" itself started out as a
reference not to excretory facilities but to clothing.
 "Toilette" was 16th-century French for "bag for
clothing"; the word came to be used for dressing, then
for dressing rooms, with or without an attached
lavatory (note!  from Latin "lavare", "to wash, bathe,
soak"), then for the lavatory facilities themselves. 
Still, we don't require our toilets to be suitable for
dressing any more than we require our bathrooms and
lavatories to be suitable for bathing.



      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz

Back to archive top level