[91201] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] tlhIngan Monopoly vISuq rIntaH!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Terrence Donnelly)
Tue Dec 6 20:47:41 2011
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:47:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net>
To: "tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org"
<tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--- On Tue, 12/6/11, qurgh lungqIj <qurgh@wizage.net> wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcgl=
obal.net> wrote:
>>I guess I wanted to know if Klingons had objects and concepts similar to =
>>ours, and what the words for those things might be.
>But doesn't the product=A0answer=A0that question?=A0
Only in the negative; we can infer from the translations what isn't native =
to them.
>Something as simple as a hamburger to us, is so alien to them that they >h=
ave to describe it as some messy lump of meat stuffed between two lumps >of=
brick made from grain. =
That may be a helpful initial description, but if Klingons were real, I'd b=
et good money that their actual day-to-day word for "hamburger' would be {H=
amburgh'ur).
>but whenever he does that he makes the language a little bit less alien.
As MO himself says, he doesn't really see Klingons using toothpaste (but an=
ything for a buck, I guess). I don't find the language less alien because w=
e sometimes get more precise definitions for true Klingon words; it feels l=
ess alien when we get words for "toothpaste".
(To be fair, I don't hate every single thing about TNK. For example, the wo=
rd for "battery" is a perfectly fine addition to the canon, mainly because =
I have no trouble seeing both the concept and the word as natively Klingon.)
>qurgh
-- ter'eS
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
