[84486] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: cha' Hol ngeb mu'ghommey Daj vItu'pu'!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sangqar)
Wed Apr 23 00:08:24 2008
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:07:25 -0600
From: Sangqar <Sangqar@hotmail.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <bd3.1f192ee2.35400212@wmconnect.com>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com wrote:
> You're using English for your example, whish is irrelevant in this context to
> Klingon.
We'd better let Okrand that English examples can't be used to elucidate
principles in Klingon!
From TKD:
***
Compound nouns consist of two or three nouns in a row, much like English
earthworm (earth plus worm) or password (pass plus word). For example,
jolpa' transportroom consists of jol transport beam plus pa' room.
***
On a more serious note, I'm a little confused as to what context renders
my example irrelevant. It can't be the fact that we're discussing
compound nouns, since Okrand clearly used English compound nouns to
demonstrate the Klingon principle. And it can't be the fact that we're
discussing pronunciation, as the majority of examples Okrand uses to
demonstrate Klingon pronunciation are English.
I'm willing to consider that my example might be irrelevant, but so far
I'm not convinced.
