[111313] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: vung
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (nIqolay Q)
Sat Sep 30 05:40:59 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <1b6d2ac0-7ce5-60b8-28e4-b1eecfe97739@trimboli.name>
From: nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 16:41:55 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============7670074445900514020==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05fb483a0686055a5a0ee5"
--94eb2c05fb483a0686055a5a0ee5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> Very good! So does *vungbogh muD* refer to only that section of the
> atmosphere that is hurricaning? When one says *SIS muD,* one is not
> talking about the part of the atmosphere that is raining as a thing
> discrete from the rest.
>
Maybe not, but if someone used *SISbogh muD* instead, I would expect they
were talking about the atmosphere that is raining as opposed to the part
that is not. Otherwise, why mention the rain at all?
Do you think we can say *SuS vung muD*? We can say *pey SIS **it rained
> acid**,* as per the above. And if we can, can we also still say *vung SuS*
> ?
I don't know if *SuS vung muD* is legitimate, although if it is, it's
probably as redundant as saying *bIQ SIS*. It seems like your underlying
question here is something along the lines of "is wind the subject or
object of 'hurricaning'?" You could interpret the wind as the result of a
larger atmospheric system, which would suggest using *SuS vung muD* or
just *vung
muD*. The winds themselves are also a major part of what drives a hurricane
internally, which suggests *vung SuS* would also be reasonable. Granted,
the winds themselves don't generate the rain (which I think is what you
were getting at with "Can the *SuS* do *SIS*?" question), except maybe in
the broad sense that they can circulate moist air within the system, so
*muD* is probably preferable as the subject if you want scientific
precision. *SuS* or *SuS'a'* aren't entirely unreasonable subjects, though,
and might be preferable if you want to focus on the hurricane's winds or if
you want an evocative noun instead of a precise one.
Also, going back to my original question, I remembered Okrand's translation
of Sonnet 116 mentions some weather (his Klingon and his English):
> *jevqu'taHvIS muD ral, bejlI' parmaq.
> Qombe'! nISbe' jevwI', 'ej not ruS baq.*
> [...]
> *While the violent atmosphere storms, love still watches.
> It does not tremble! The storm does not disrupt it, and it never terminates the bond.*
>
> Which suggests that *muD* is a reasonable explicit subject for weather
verbs, and that *-wI'* can be used to refer to weather verbs as discrete
systems (so *vungwI'* would then be a way to talk about hurricanes as
nouns).
--94eb2c05fb483a0686055a5a0ee5
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, SuStel <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto=
:sustel@trimboli.name" target=3D"_blank">sustel@trimboli.name</a>></span=
> wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex=
;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor=3D"#=
FFFFFF"><p>Very good! So does <b>vungbogh muD</b> refer to only that
section of the atmosphere that is hurricaning? When one says <b>SIS
muD,</b> one is not talking about the part of the atmosphere
that is raining as a thing discrete from the rest. </p></div></blockq=
uote><div>Maybe not, but if someone used <b>SIS<i>bogh</i> muD</b> instead,=
I would expect they were talking about the atmosphere that is raining as o=
pposed to the part that is not. Otherwise, why mention the rain at all?</di=
v><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px =
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Do you t=
hink we can say <b>SuS vung muD</b>? We can say <b>pey
SIS </b><i>it rained acid</i><b>,</b> as per the above. And
if we can, can we also still say <b>vung SuS</b>?<b> </b></blockquote=
><div><br></div><div>I don't know if <b>SuS vung muD</b> is legitimate,=
although if it is, it's probably as redundant as saying <b>bIQ SIS</b>=
. It seems like your underlying question here is something along the lines =
of "is wind the subject or object of 'hurricaning'?" You =
could interpret the wind as the result of a larger atmospheric system, whic=
h would suggest using <b>SuS vung muD</b> or just <b>vung muD</b>. The wind=
s themselves are also a major part of what drives a hurricane internally, w=
hich suggests <b>vung SuS</b> would also be reasonable. Granted, the winds =
themselves don't generate the rain (which I think is what you were gett=
ing at with "Can
the <b>SuS</b> do <b>SIS</b>?" question), except maybe in the br=
oad sense that they can circulate moist air within the system, so <b>muD</b=
> is probably preferable as the subject if you want scientific precision. <=
b>SuS</b> or <b>SuS'a'</b> aren't entirely unreasonable subject=
s, though, and might be preferable if you want to focus on the hurricane=
9;s winds or if you want an evocative noun instead of a precise one.<br></d=
iv><div><br></div><div>Also, going back to my original question, I remember=
ed Okrand's translation of Sonnet 116 mentions some weather (his Klingo=
n and his English):</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:=
0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">=
<div><pre><span style=3D"font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><b>jevqu&#=
39;taHvIS muD ral, bejlI' parmaq.
Qombe'! nISbe' jevwI', 'ej not ruS baq.</b><br>[...]<br><i>=
While the violent atmosphere storms, love still watches.
It does not tremble! The storm does not disrupt it, and it never terminates=
the bond.</i></span></pre></div></blockquote><div>Which suggests that <b>m=
uD</b> is a reasonable explicit subject for weather verbs, and that <b>-wI&=
#39;</b> can be used to refer to weather verbs as discrete systems (so <b>v=
ungwI'</b> would then be a way to talk about hurricanes as nouns).<br><=
/div></div><br></div></div>
--94eb2c05fb483a0686055a5a0ee5--
--===============7670074445900514020==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============7670074445900514020==--
