[84719] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: SoSwI' SoH'a'?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Tue May 20 17:36:55 2008
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20080520145124.03892200@imap.uchicago.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 17:35:40 -0400
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
From: ghunchu'wI' <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On May 20, 2008, at 4:07 PM, Steven Boozer wrote:
> Of course we could translate the appositional phrase {SoS bo'Degh}
> "mother
> bird" literally, but I think ghunchu'wI' and I were uncomfortable
> because
> it's too anthropomorphic: i.e. do Klingons use {SoS} and {ghu} (or
> {be'}
> "female" and {loD} "male" for that matter!) to refer to animals?
I have no problem with the words. The way the sentence is put
together just doesn't sit well in my mind. ter'eS pegged it: knowing
the story, apposition is obviously the intended meaning, but the
wording doesn't quite seem to make it obvious to the reader.
After letting my brain soak in it for a while, I believe I'd avoid
the problem and just say {bo'Degh} for the mother bird. The way I
think of it, the bird would probably say {puqwI'vaD Soj vIqemnIS} to
herself, calling the chick {puq}, but the narrator might refer to it
as {bo'DeghHom}. If you don't feel comfortable using {-Hom} this way
(I used {loDHom} and {be'Hom} as a model), then {bo'Degh puq} seems
perfectly fine.
