tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 17 19:44:36 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Hypothetical (reconstructed) vocabulary?
- From: Christopher Doty <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Hypothetical (reconstructed) vocabulary?
- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:41:54 -0800
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=Fe4QzLGJK5uOMsxr21oA23jdZYs9c3/1SGa0CjmIWDg=; b=PcyiKUCDLzTEI2u29E5N43U+q9l7lBEpNbJ1T5vkLWrLAAC0jYpeKA7ia0wcPXRXSt RwEhxnjA64CW+w3z9+jzGmPqw/4U4loWOpmAVxX0tIBdIXYcevq3wZnCAiBSOvlmLO8b w/EvsPBj4Cj1/MO3GQQNhU+V/YCwzkkRSLjWQ=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=gVM6ZvQDKCKrdZburApI9RKnWcL3tRRHe9/Yras2iiWFdic+YRGDVNnLktEhkxRMgJ Ru4pHgYYLrFWq9QUZKEhG4Oo2Q2DvbPPz3JMTnSjlykz1EcdaEcX6k3Eb+HY5AksPiat 27kKdnmvsmgPR2oE6OH5OdAqCnGohHCGwHH3s=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Way behind the curve here, apparently (damn school....). A couple of
additions to the list, mentioned in TKD:
'ejDo' for starship
'ejyo' for Starfleet
Interestingly, we also have some hints of sound change or another
compound here, as Okrand reckons that <Do'> is probably an old word
for "space vessel" while the modern word is <Duj>. It thus seems like
there is either an old for fixed in <Do'>, or that, at some point, the
compound <'ejDo'> got flipped around to <Do''ej>, and then reduced to
<Duj>...
I was also thinking not long ago about the person prefixes, which,
despite being basically unanalyzable at present, still have some hints
of a more transparent system at some stage past. I'll try to remember
what I thought, and send it around for consideration...
Chris
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 17:31, David Trimboli <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 1/12/2010 8:23 PM, Alex Greene wrote:
>>>> "That is not so" would be something like "qarbe' Dochvetlh,"
>>>> "lughbe' Dochvetlh" or "teHbe' Dochvetlh" if I were trying to
>>>> translate the above sentence. *vajHa' doesn't sit right with me
>>>> either.
>>>
>>> When Maltz balks at something, my impression is that he considers
>>> it "not the way a Klingon would say it," not that it doesn't make
>>> sense to him. /We/ completely lack any way to reason along these
>>> lines.
>>
>> It's okay to just say that it's M. Okrand balking at the
>> construction, and deciding that *vajHa' doesn't sit right with him.
>
> But how do you know that's what is happening? I don't believe it is.
> Okrand likes to include lots of little "'cause that's the way they say
> it" rules in the language, having nothing to do with whether it "sits
> right" with him. When he says Maltz balks, he means Maltz balks, not
> that he balks.
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://www.trimboli.name/
>
>
>
>