[111462] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] male female baby
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Fri Oct 6 06:56:44 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <381958f4-9bcd-9d3a-78e9-5519a5f3179a@trimboli.name>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 18:10:03 +0300
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============1386975778738664345==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c616ac48ce9055aa5e2ac"
--f403045c616ac48ce9055aa5e2ac
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
SuStel:
> That implies to my mind that the baby is a man.
So, if you saw {ghu loDHom}, this would imply that the baby is a boy ? And
if yes, what's the problem ? This was the intended meaning in the first
place.
mayqel q
On Oct 3, 2017 17:42, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 10/3/2017 10:37 AM, Lieven wrote:
>
> Am 03.10.2017 um 15:57 schrieb Andr=C3=A9 M=C3=BCller:
>
> My thoughts on this: We say {puqloD} and {puqbe'}, which are literally
> 'childman' and 'childwoman'. So I think {ghu loD} is more logical.
>
>
> In addition, we also have the {qItbe'} a female kind of guineafowl.
>
> Cousins are {lorbe'} and {lorloD}, and {tey'be'} and {tey'loD}.
>
> This might confirm that the gender follows the type it odifies. Having
> {be'nal} and {loDnal}, doe not count by the way, beause here, all the
> nal-ed family memebers end with {-nal}.
>
> But what if Klingons do not make a difference with babies? We don't do
> that in English either, do we?
>
> To avoid the problem, I would make this two phrases:
> {ghu vIlegh. loD ghaH.}
>
> That implies to my mind that the baby is a man. Say this instead: *ghu
> vIlegh; loDHom ghaH.*
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
--f403045c616ac48ce9055aa5e2ac
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;f=
ont-size:13.696px">SuStel:</span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"fon=
t-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">> That implies to my mind that t=
he baby is a man.</span><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-fam=
ily:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"><br></span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span=
style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">So, if you saw {ghu lo=
DHom}, this would imply that the baby is a boy ? And if yes, what's the=
problem ? This was the intended meaning in the first place.</span></div><d=
iv dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"><=
br></span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;fon=
t-size:13.696px">mayqel q</span></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br>=
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Oct 3, 2017 17:42, "SuStel" <<a =
href=3D"mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" target=3D"_blank">sustel@trimboli.name=
</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" s=
tyle=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
=20
=20
=20
<div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF">
<div class=3D"m_1019190621365979243moz-cite-prefix">On 10/3/2017 10:37 =
AM, Lieven wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">Am
03.10.2017 um 15:57 schrieb Andr=C3=A9 M=C3=BCller:
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite" style=3D"color:#000000">My thoughts on
this: We say {puqloD} and {puqbe'}, which are literally
'childman' and 'childwoman'. So I think {ghu loD} i=
s more
logical.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
In addition, we also have the {qItbe'} a female kind of
guineafowl.
<br>
<br>
Cousins are {lorbe'} and {lorloD}, and {tey'be'} and {tey=
'loD}.
<br>
<br>
This might confirm that the gender follows the type it odifies.
Having {be'nal} and {loDnal}, doe not count by the way, beause
here, all the nal-ed family memebers end with {-nal}.
<br>
<br>
But what if Klingons do not make a difference with babies? We
don't do that in English either, do we?
<br>
<br>
To avoid the problem, I would make this two phrases:
<br>
{ghu vIlegh. loD ghaH.}
</blockquote>
<p>That implies to my mind that the baby is a man. Say this instead:
<b>ghu vIlegh; loDHom ghaH.</b><br>
</p>
<pre class=3D"m_1019190621365979243moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
SuStel
<a class=3D"m_1019190621365979243moz-txt-link-freetext" href=3D"http://trim=
boli.name" target=3D"_blank">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a=
><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.<wbr>cgi/tlhinga=
n-hol-kli.org</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>
--f403045c616ac48ce9055aa5e2ac--
--===============1386975778738664345==
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
--===============1386975778738664345==--
