[88884] in tlhIngan-Hol
chomuSHa''a'? ghorgh chomuS!? - Question about muSHa'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Felix Malmenbeck)
Thu Jun 16 17:51:35 2011
From: Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se>
To: "tlhIngan-Hol@KLI.org" <tlhIngan-Hol@KLI.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 21:42:03 +0000
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
I fairly often see the word muSHa' being used as a way of saying "love", supposedly due to the logic that because muS is stronger than par, muSHa' should be stronger than parHa'.
I personally do not much agree with this logic; -Ha' is used to signify that something previously done has become undone (and one must not first hate somebody in order to love them), or that something is done wrongly (and while I cannot be certain, I'd be surprised if Klingons equated loving with hating incorrectly); it's not a polar opposite marker.
par exemple:
"I had my Annotated Klingon Dictionary with me, and Marc spent some time
looking through it. We discussed some stuff I had added marked
"inferred" - mostly compunds or verb+{Ha'} entries which seemed pretty
clear. Well, I need to go through and look at some of them closer. One
example that sticks in my head is {jotlh}, which is given in TKD as
"take down". I had added {jotlhHa'} as "put up", but Marc pointed out
that {-Ha'} not only negates but changes state (undoes), and that "put
back up" would be a better translation."
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file97-04-07-email.txt&get=source
So, one does not jotlhHa' something unless somebody has originally jotlh:ed it.
"It may be that not everything has a default. Note, for example, {QuchHa'}
"be unhappy" and {'IQ} "be sad." These two words don't mean quite the same
thing: {QuchHa'} is made up of {Quch} "be happy" plus the negative suffix
{-Ha'}, suggesting a change from being happy to not being happy. {'IQ} does
not have this connotation, nor does {Quchbe'} "be not happy" (or, if you
prefer, "not be happy")."
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02a-news.txt&get=source
Note that there's no indication that QuchHa' is stronger than Quchbe'.
"Which brings us to {Qochbe'} and {QochHa'}. Both consist of the verb
{Qoch} "disagree" plus a negative suffix. Parallel to the example above
with {yaj} "understand," {Qochbe'} implies an absence of disagreeing
(hence "agree"); {QochHa'} implies that any disagreeing was misplaced or
misconstrued or perhaps has been "undone.""
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02b-news.txt&get=source
Again, QochHa' does not appear to be stronger than Qochbe'; the two are simply different.
"On the other hand, when the only way to express a certain idea is by
modifying a word (for example, by adding a suffix) rather than using an
entirely different word, perhaps one can argue that the nonmodified word is
the default. Thus, the only (known) way to express the opposite of {par}
"dislike" is by adding a negative suffix to {par}. Unlike {QuchHa'} "be
unhappy" and {'IQ} "be sad," there's no choice when it comes to "like";
you've got to use a word based on {par}: {parHa'}. It appears that the
only kind of "like" there is is the "undoing" or "misapplication" of
"dislike." (Of course, you could also say {parbe'} "like" or, more
literally, "not dislike," using the negative suffix {-be'} "not"; but
{parbe'} is also based on {par}. {parHa'} is heard more frequently than
{parbe'}, however, and this may be a hint at the usual way a Klingon looks
at things.)
Interestingly (and bolstering the idea that "dislike" is a default),
there's also the word {muS} "hate" (which is presumably stronger somehow
than {par} "dislike"). It also has no known opposite except for the
suffixed forms: {muSHa'} "dis-hate" or "unhate"; {muSbe'} "not hate.""
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file98-03-02a-news.txt&get=source
The way I read this, parHa' isn't really stronger than parbe'; the face that parHa' is used more often than parbe' is more likely a hint about how Klingons regard the liking of things.
As I see it, it's possible to muSHa' somebody and par them at the same time, for instance if you've gotten over your hatred for somebody but simply prefer not to be around him/her.
Your thoughts?
//loghaD
P.S. Another relevant source on the subject:
http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file96-12-12b-news.txt&get=source
D.S.
