tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 11 04:42:32 2013

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] do {vIttlhegh} become {ngo'} or {qan}?

De'vID (de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com)



De'vID:
>> So KGT rules out {ngo'} applied to people.

DloraH:
> Does it rule it out?  When talking about people, typically one is discussing age.

"The word {ngo'} in the phrase above means old as opposed to new.
Thus, it would be applied to objects or ideas, but not to animals or
people."

It certainly rules out something like {nuv ngo'} or {tlhIngan ngo'}.
Perhaps it leaves room for {ghuv ngo'} and {mangHom ngo'}, but I'm not
sure.

DloraH:
> A new chancellor is not necessarily young.  He could be 100 years old, but became chancellor just
> yesterday.

qen Qang moj. DaH che'bogh Qang ghaH.

The problem with {Qang ngo'} is that I'm not sure if it means
"(current) chancellor who has been serving for a long time" or "former
chancellor (who is no longer serving in that position)". Klingon makes
a finer distinction than English for "old (not young)" and "old (not
new)"; but it doesn't make the distinction between "old (not recent)"
and "old (not current)".

DloraH:
> Likewise, if he has been chancellor for a while, he is not new, and the opposite is
> ngo'.

ben law' [qenHa'?] Qang gheSpu'. qaStaHvIS poH nI' Qang Da.

DloraH:
> One's service as chancellor can be new or old (ngo').

ngo' patlhDaj. 'ach ngo'laHbe'law' ghaH.

DloraH:
> A couple's friendship can be new or old (ngo').

Their friendship, yes; but can one of them be a {jup ngo'}? (And
again: does it mean "long-time" friend, or "former" friend?)

DloraH:
> The age of the people involved would use young or old (qan).

The people themselves can be {qan}. The sentence from KGT seems to
suggest that the people themselves cannot be {ngo'} (though something
about them can be).

DloraH:
> Reminds me of whether one uses "capable of language" when someone is dead.  It depends on what
> aspect of the person you are discussing.

It doesn't seem analogous to me. A dead Romulan is still a Romulan. So
is a Romulan baby who is incapable (yet) of speech, or a mute Romulan.

KGT says {ngo'} "would be applied to objects or ideas, but not to
animals or people." Just because we're talking about someone as a
friend or a chancellor, it doesn't mean that they're suddenly not a
person and become an object or idea.

-- 
De'vID

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol



Back to archive top level