tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 31 10:04:44 2012
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] More new words from Maltz
I've always thought Maltz was a science officer, but after a quick glance at the evidenceit seems I was wrong. Does this mean we won't learn the mass of the Higgs boson at qep'a' cha'maHDIch? :(
Anyhow, it's true as you say that these are laymen descriptions; when reading the description of the difference between a qung and a QemjIq, the image in our heads should be of a Klingon with a pained expression, writhing and making weird gestures as he struggles to find the right words.
QemjIqmey probably make up a class of holes, a cursory glance of which would indicate that they're "more fillable:ish" than qungmey, until some know-it-all comes along with a counter-example. Klingons can probably spend an afternoon arguing over whether something is a QemjIq or a qung, with some arguing that it's both.
[Speaking of specialized words: Swedes are very jealous of all the vocabulary English has for various species of nerdlike creatures. I mean, we're stuck with nörd and possibly tönt, while you have nerds, geeks, dweebs, dorks, melvins and Odin knows what else!]
________________________________________
From: Qov [[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 18:15
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] More new words from Maltz
Hey, the informant is a gullible gunner, not a topologist, not a
mathematician, not a biologist (I'm convinced that if he knew the
distinction between a vein and an artery, that Marc just didn't think
to quiz him on whether an 'aD spurts or leaks blood when you cut it)
and not a linguist. matlh has no idea what really makes a qung a qung
and a QemjIq a QemjIq. He just knows them when he sees them. He's
probably given us a smattering of vulgar misinformation, embedding
shibboleths in any would-be Federation-trained spies. Much of what we
say is going to be wrong register, wrong word, unknown exception and
the like, but we can get it done.
I remember a young doctor in Leningrad telling me that, "In this
kladbishche lie the cadavers of many important persons."
Kladbishche is cemetary. He didn't know the word in English, but knew
I knew the Russian because I had just used it. We were speaking each
other's language for the practice. He knew through his studies the
specific English word for "dead human body." He had no idea that it
was restricted to the context of medical dissection. I mean who would
guess that we had a word that specialized? It's still not as cool a
word as the English one meaning "to remove dead flesh from living"
but we still have cool words.
Sure, try to pin down meanings, try to avoid using words where we're
told they don't fit. Don't use words in a way that makes Klingon
English, but don't hurt yourself trying to avoid embarrassing
situations. Case in point from the same trip to Russia: I knew a
Russian word denoting "male roommate." I knew a suffix useful for
converting words denoting males to the female form. I boldly asked
the desk clerk if my lesbian lover was in the room. One has no way of
knowing these things. Speak boldly and keep your betleH sharp.
:-)
- Qov
At 08:32 31/01/2012, you wrote:
>Very true. However, I suspect the comment about QemjIqmey being
>fillable and qungmey not was a bit of a misdtatement; after all, one
>can fill most small qungmey with a bit of lam Dogh.
>
>I suspect the distinction is about one of two things:
>
>1) Topology: Depressions(holes with "dead ends") are QemjIqmey,
>true holes are qungmey.
>2) The depth of the material: Much like the way 'ab refers to
>"longish, skinnyish things", perhaps qungmey refer to punctures in
>"membranish, sheetlike things"; things with depths that are small
>compared to width and length.
>
>2) strikes me as being the more natural distinction to make,
>alrhough I personally prefer 1).
>Neither 1) nor 2) satisfies Okrand's non-fillability criterion, however.
>
>________________________________________
>From: Terrence Donnelly [[email protected]]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 16:34
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] More new words from Maltz
>
>You're probably right in general, but I would point out that you can
>easily "fill" the mouth of a bottle by putting a cork or other
>stopper in it (I believe we have seen many bottles on Star Trek that
>were closed with stoppers).
>
>-- ter'eS
>
>--- On Tue, 1/31/12, Lieven Litaer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>From: Lieven Litaer <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] More new words from Maltz
>To: [email protected]
>Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2012, 6:48 AM
>
>ter'eS wrote:
>How about QemjIq as the mouth of a bottle? Topologically it's not
>much different from the soundhole of a musical instrument with a soundbox.
>
>I think of the mouth of a bottle more like a {qung}, you can put
>your finger through it and you cannot fill it. If you fill it, it's
>the bottle you fill, not its mouth.
>Nevertheless, I'm sure Klingons have their own word for that, or
>call it like you did the "mouth" of the bottle. It doesn't sound
>correct to say "There's a hole in the bottle." In that case it's broken :-)
>
>By the way, I'm pretty sure you can {vegh} a {qung}, as long as it's
>large enough.
>
>Lieven.
>
>
>SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und
>kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192
>
>-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>_______________________________________________
>Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>[email protected]</mc/[email protected]>
>http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol