tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 25 17:09:34 2011
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] beings capable of speech
- From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] beings capable of speech
- Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 11:09:22 +1000
- Importance: Normal
- In-reply-to: <CA+7zAmO8vU6rhkY51JoRLPt1ztdEvzzJ7goTSXzAYn=vap8AaA@mail.gmail.com>
- List-archive: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/>
- List-id: <tlhingan-hol.stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
- List-subscribe: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol>, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
- References: <CA+7zAmP9zmRU6qSyDCFsCOSx+xaqgSw0dOEJ=T9A6iNh-Hdz-w@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmOz_jH9mOPCOM0AXCLjOb324Kk6hJtG3L22S-CFvUT9Cw@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmPAPPru=h1VvymvW24GagDLoJuDfA42qrxD3JGPW7+YyA@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMFYOEy0Jsqbx4DDJu_D20gZ=Cdb9kJcx30sKC=iycmgA@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMp4-JPokFs5Xgjbw4-n5FZzn_2Fa7w9ozp+AdXT+Qcxg@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMEu0a2xZW4jOxdWcCBWWVQCRY8sAQRAS9rW17a815b5A@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmNN4zdZRNra-ePrAiJKGjn-R5kyjweUF6WaxK94TX8DMg@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMHeQ9VMHx=3dTfKrYJAXiejL4Yx73HKt6aruOXVawyfQ@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmNX6L09j2CL=kXj7MKbkA_4PTuc1XJaGpPmGJ6UFLyvCw@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmOQH2iaw_YiMLEfU7PhoEObpD_peh_+njNxmw8ALy7+tw@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmOQ1PCrU3XxN-GxW=rqqXPMHDLGHpBZEV5M3cg+SAgJoA@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmNdjXpT61iQPkypzCoiGasu=ZrTgP9Vehuap4gFN_WEEA@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMuU0NZNTRs5r=aygsUa-7ucNwAqt3YOmeTSH_pW3N+Uw@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMvZq4r3aW3WVBT_u35Tm1Va7ej-vu=NLiraqvPPhTeDA@mail.gmail.com>, <CA+7zAmMDUTBF=feiV4=3frAyQvPek [email protected]>, <CA+7zAmO8vU6rhkY51JoRLPt1ztdEvzzJ7goTSXzAYn=vap8AaA@mail.gmail.com>
ghItlhpu' De'vID, jatlh:
> I don't know whether the apparent Human penchant for writing stories
> where the protagonists are animals extends to Klingons, but if they
> also tell stories involving talking animals, or if they were to
> translate such stories into Klingon, would the animals take the "beings
> capable of speech" suffixes?
We have two small pieces of evidence that come to mind; unfortunately
they contradict each other. The first is the continued use of {-Du'} with
words like {DeSqIv} even when the word applies to the handles of a pot;
the other is the variable use of {-pu'} or {-mey} to apply to speech-
mimicking birds like the {qaryoq} or {vIlInHoD}.
Personally, I think that the latter is more persuasive, given this from
the HolQeD article about birds:
"The plural suffix for birds is
usually {-mey}, the general plural
suffix,
as would be expected. There
is a difference of opinion, however,
about
which plural suffix to use for a
few birds capable of mimicking
speech,
such as the {vIlInHoD} and
the {qaryoq} (and the larger
{qaryoq'a'}),
with some Klingons
using {-mey} but others preferring
{-pu'}, the plural
suffix for beings
capable of using language. Maltz is a
member of the
former camp; he said
he was never able to engage a
{qaryoq} in a
conversation that made
any sense." (HolQeD v10n4p5)
The fact that Maltz's criterion for using {-mey} is the lack of sensible
conversation tells me that something that one *can* sensibly engage in
conversation with would be generally considered as {-pu'}-able. So talking
targs would be {targhpu'}.
taH:
> Would a talking {raS} refer to its {'uSDu'}?
Yes. I reckon the {nevDagh} example makes it incontrovertible - and even
if the table was non-talking I still think it has {'uSDu'}, not {'uSmey}.
QeS 'utlh
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol