[84897] in tlhIngan-Hol
RE: idea for writing system
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Fiat Knox)
Sun Jul 27 18:40:34 2008
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 2008 23:39:18 +0100 (BST)
From: Fiat Knox <fiat_knox@yahoo.co.uk>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <000a01c8f034$845b9820$0800a8c0@juH.Seruqtuq.net>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
--- DloraH <seruq@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I was just pointing out that it wouldn't work if each
> suffix was represented by a single glyph.
> "thinkin'" breaks up that suffix and puts in another
> character. If -ing was represented by a single
> letter, how would you break it up to spell it
> differently?
Colloquial English would not necessarily end up parsing as
colloquial Klingon. The assumption is that "thinkin'" is a
shorthand way of saying "thinking" and the Klingon verb for
"think" would be the resulting word anyway.
As for "-luH" or "-la'" or indeed "-oy" which begins with a
vowel rather than a "'," perhaps they could be spelt letter
for letter, with the individual letter symbols representing
"l," "u," "H," "a" or "'" accordingly.
Or the writing system could have a single symbol for
"-able" that has no verbal translation, or at least none
obtained from "the interrogation of Maltz."
Question: does the "-luH / -la'" matter appear in KGT at
all? I don't have it handy. My memory of whether it's
referred to in KGT, even as a slang, is unclear.
__________________________________________________________
Not happy with your email address?.
Get the one you really want - millions of new email addresses available now at Yahoo! http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/ymail/new.html
