[86875] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: tlhIngan porgh
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stephen A. Carter)
Thu Nov 19 19:33:31 2009
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:32:44 +0900
From: "Stephen A. Carter" <scarter@hticn.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A6011382A8825E@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On 09/11/20 06:02, Steven Boozer wrote:
> Voragh:
>>> and {porghQeD} "the scientific study of bodily functions (anatomy?).
>
> Stephen A. Carter:
>> "Physiology" might be a closer fit.
>
> Nice. That fits Maltz/Okrand's explanation better:
>
> HQ 12.4:8: Maltz was familiar with the scientific study of bodily functions, or {porghQeD}, but he didn't consider himself terribly well versed in the field. The closest he could come to "bodily function" was {porgh mIw}, literally "body process", but he had a hard time thinking of an everyday sentence containing that phrase. He said that Klingons don't talk all that much about bodily functions as a group, but they certainly do talk about specific bodily functions.
> But if we limit {porghQeD} ("body science") to "physiology", how would we differentiate it from "anatomy"?
That's a good question.
As a starting point for discussion, physiology deals with the body's
functioning, and anatomy deals with its structure. And since {porghQeD}
is canonically defined as "the scientific study of bodily functions," it
looks like it maps to physiology, rather than anatomy.
--
Stephen A. Carter
scarter@hticn.com
Nagoya, Japan
