tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 20 14:36:46 2008

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: SoSwI' SoH'a'?

ghunchu'wI' ([email protected])



On May 20, 2008, at 4:07 PM, Steven Boozer wrote:

> Of course we could translate the appositional phrase {SoS bo'Degh}  
> "mother
> bird" literally, but I think ghunchu'wI' and I were uncomfortable  
> because
> it's too anthropomorphic:  i.e. do Klingons use {SoS} and {ghu} (or  
> {be'}
> "female" and {loD} "male" for that matter!) to refer to animals?

I have no problem with the words.  The way the sentence is put  
together just doesn't sit well in my mind.  ter'eS pegged it: knowing  
the story, apposition is obviously the intended meaning, but the  
wording doesn't quite seem to make it obvious to the reader.

After letting my brain soak in it for a while, I believe I'd avoid  
the problem and just say {bo'Degh} for the mother bird.  The way I  
think of it, the bird would probably say {puqwI'vaD Soj vIqemnIS} to  
herself, calling the chick {puq}, but the narrator might refer to it  
as {bo'DeghHom}.  If you don't feel comfortable using {-Hom} this way  
(I used {loDHom} and {be'Hom} as a model), then {bo'Degh puq} seems  
perfectly fine.





Back to archive top level