tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 17 09:28:41 2011

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: chomuSHa''a'? ghorgh chomuS!? - Question about muSHa'

Robyn Stewart ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

Good points, all, and although I know we can't disassemble words, the 
terms parmaq and parmaqqay might point to par being the right word to 
go to for romantic love.  There's no linguistic process I know of 
that could turn parHa'qu' to parmaq, but that could be Okrand making 
fun, H and m being about as far apart as sounds can get.

I think I'll prefer parHa' for such translations now, based on your arguments.

- Qov.

At 13:42 16/06/2011, you wrote:
>I fairly often see the word muSHa' being used as a way of saying 
>"love", supposedly due to the logic that because muS is stronger 
>than par, muSHa' should be stronger than parHa'.
>I personally do not much agree with this logic; -Ha' is used to 
>signify that something previously done has become undone (and one 
>must not first hate somebody in order to love them), or that 
>something is done wrongly (and while I cannot be certain, I'd be 
>surprised if Klingons equated loving with hating incorrectly); it's 
>not a polar opposite marker.
>par exemple:
>
>"I had my Annotated Klingon Dictionary with me, and Marc spent some time
>looking through it.  We discussed some stuff I had added marked
>"inferred" - mostly compunds or verb+{Ha'} entries which seemed pretty
>clear.  Well, I need to go through and look at some of them closer.  One
>example that sticks in my head is {jotlh}, which is given in TKD as
>"take down".  I had added {jotlhHa'} as "put up", but Marc pointed out
>that {-Ha'} not only negates but changes state (undoes), and that "put
>back up" would be a better translation."
>http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file97-04-07-email.txt&get=source
>
>So, one does not jotlhHa' something unless somebody has originally 
>jotlh:ed it.
>
>"It may be that not everything has a default.  Note, for example, {QuchHa'}
>"be unhappy" and {'IQ} "be sad."  These two words don't mean quite the same
>thing: {QuchHa'} is made up of {Quch} "be happy" plus the negative suffix
>{-Ha'}, suggesting a change from being happy to not being happy. {'IQ} does
>not have this connotation, nor does {Quchbe'} "be not happy" (or, if you
>prefer, "not be happy")."
>http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02a-news.txt&get=source
>
>Note that there's no indication that QuchHa' is stronger than Quchbe'.
>
>"Which brings us to {Qochbe'} and {QochHa'}.  Both consist of the verb
>{Qoch} "disagree" plus a negative suffix.  Parallel to the example above
>with {yaj} "understand,"  {Qochbe'} implies an absence of disagreeing
>(hence "agree"); {QochHa'} implies that any disagreeing was misplaced or
>misconstrued or perhaps has been "undone.""
>http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02b-news.txt&get=source
>
>Again, QochHa' does not appear to be stronger than Qochbe'; the two 
>are simply different.
>
>"On the other hand, when the only way to express a certain idea is by
>modifying a word (for example, by adding a suffix) rather than using an
>entirely different word, perhaps one can argue that the nonmodified word is
>the default.  Thus, the only (known) way to express the opposite of {par}
>"dislike" is by adding a negative suffix to {par}.  Unlike {QuchHa'} "be
>unhappy" and {'IQ} "be sad," there's no choice when it comes to "like";
>you've got to use a word based on {par}: {parHa'}.  It appears that the
>only kind of "like" there is is the "undoing" or "misapplication" of
>"dislike."  (Of course, you could also say {parbe'} "like" or, more
>literally, "not dislike,"  using the negative suffix {-be'} "not"; but
>{parbe'} is also based on {par}.  {parHa'} is heard more frequently than
>{parbe'}, however, and this may be a hint at the usual way a Klingon looks
>at things.)
>
>Interestingly (and bolstering the idea that "dislike" is a default),
>there's also the word {muS} "hate" (which is presumably stronger somehow
>than {par} "dislike").  It also has no known opposite except for the
>suffixed forms:  {muSHa'} "dis-hate" or "unhate"; {muSbe'} "not hate.""
>http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02a-news.txt&get=source
>
>The way I read this, parHa' isn't really stronger than parbe'; the 
>face that parHa' is used more often than parbe' is more likely a 
>hint about how Klingons regard the liking of things.
>
>As I see it, it's possible to muSHa' somebody and par them at the 
>same time, for instance if you've gotten over your hatred for 
>somebody but simply prefer not to be around him/her.
>
>Your thoughts?
>
>//loghaD
>
>P.S. Another relevant source on the subject:
>http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file96-12-12b-news.txt&get=source
>D.S.

Back to archive top level