[94843] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: Doq 'ej wovbe'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Mon Oct 15 11:12:11 2012
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 01:11:55 +1000
In-Reply-To: <CALPi+eT6xofM9kETDPAZn715rW3etPd0NXvEcykO66F--xPcsA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============3111532478804060208==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_c71234dc-854a-465f-94b5-5e3310c19ba6_"
--_c71234dc-854a-465f-94b5-5e3310c19ba6_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
jIjatlhpu':
> I was going to keep my trap shut=2C but I'm glad someone else has raised =
this.
> With all due respect to qurgh=2C and not wanting to sound like a pedantic=
old
> curmudgeon ('coz it's led to fiery confrontation before and I don't want
> that)=2C Doq 'ej wovbe' isn't a verb=3B
mujang qurgh=2C jatlh:
> But "be brown" is a verb
No=2C it isn't. It's a verb phrase.
> and the phrase is made up of two verbs. This
> entry is primarily for English speakers searching for relevant words
> in my database=2C so if they search for "brown" they get an example of
> how to say brown instead of getting nothing.
If it's based off the English words=2C doesn't that ultimately mean that it=
actually becomes an English word of the day=2C with a Klingon gloss?=20
> If it was listed as a noun they=2C not knowing how Klingon works=2C would=
just
> throw in <Doq 'ej wovbe'> thinking it's a complete noun phrase for brown
I agree with you totally here - it's not a noun=2C either. I didn't mean to=
imply that it is.
> (the way nagh beQ is a phrase for a "painting")=2C it's also not chuvmey=
=2C so it's
> listed a verb because it's a "verb phrase" that has a known meaning
> and the verb parts can be conjugated normally (you could say jIDoq 'ej
> jIwovbe').
Ah. Are you only using the categories of noun=2C verb and chuvmey for every=
thing? I guess I just find the use of the gloss "verb" to be too simplistic=
here. You're exactly right - it is possible to say jIDoq 'ej jIwovbe' - bu=
t as you say above=2C they=2C not knowing how Klingon works=2C would throw =
in Doq 'ej wovbe' thinking it's a complete verb phrase for brown. And they =
might be very tempted to conjugate it as such=2C with a prefix only on the =
first word.
> As an advanced speaker of the language=2C you already know everything
> there is to know about the phrase=2C so it has no negative impact on you
> and others at your level when you see it. However=2C this "Word of the
> Day" goes out to far more beginner speakers and those with a passing
> interest in Klingon than it does to advanced speakers=2C so it's
> tailored to give them the most information without overwhelming them.
I understand that=2C and that's why I think this entry is problematic. It o=
versimplifies matters on at least three separate points. And as you say=2C =
I'm an advanced speaker=2C so I can avoid the negative impacts of that over=
simplification. Those who are beginning speakers=2C or have only mild inter=
est=2C aren't going to know what the problems are=2C and will be hit by all=
of them.
> If you can think of another way to share the Klingon phrase that means
> "to be brown" in the same amount of space (140 chars=2C as it's sent
> over twitter too)=2C then I'm more than willing to reevaluate this
> entry.
"The" Klingon phrase that means "to be brown"? That's what my point is=2C r=
eally. I guess what I mean is that it's not really what should appear in a =
Klingon Word of the Day. It's not a word - it's a phrase=2C which makes it =
grammatically complicated=2C doubly so when verbs are involved - and it ska=
tes over a very complicated area of Klingon usage. It's hard enough for peo=
ple to come to terms with the fact that Klingon has four colour terms corre=
sponding to ten of ours=3B I don't think it needs any further complexity. I=
f you want to say that there's a single Klingon word for "be brown"=2C then=
it's Doq=2C as 'anan naHQun pointed out (my mistake - I thought the refere=
nce to it as meaning "be brown" was in KGT=2C but it's not=2C it's from Hol=
QeD 8:1=2C p.7).
As an aside=2C the literature on colour terms is fascinating and definitely=
worth checking out.
QeS
=
--_c71234dc-854a-465f-94b5-5e3310c19ba6_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt=3B
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>
jIjatlhpu':<br>>=3B I was going to keep my trap shut=2C but I'm glad some=
one else has raised this.<br><div>>=3B With all due respect to qurgh=2C a=
nd not wanting to sound like a pedantic old<br>>=3B curmudgeon ('coz it's=
led to fiery confrontation before and I don't want<br>>=3B that)=2C Doq =
'ej wovbe' isn't a verb=3B<br><br>mujang qurgh=2C jatlh:<br>>=3B But "be =
brown" is a verb<br><br>No=2C it isn't. It's a verb phrase.<br><br>>=3B a=
nd the phrase is made up of two verbs. This<br>>=3B entry is primarily fo=
r English speakers searching for relevant words<br>>=3B in my database=2C=
so if they search for "brown" they get an example of<br>>=3B how to say =
brown instead of getting nothing.<br><br>If it's based off the English word=
s=2C doesn't that ultimately mean that it actually becomes an English word =
of the day=2C with a Klingon gloss? <br><br>>=3B If it was listed as a no=
un they=2C not knowing how Klingon works=2C would just<br>>=3B throw in &=
lt=3BDoq 'ej wovbe'>=3B thinking it's a complete noun phrase for brown<br=
><br>I agree with you totally here - it's not a noun=2C either. I didn't me=
an to imply that it is.<br><br>>=3B (the way nagh beQ is a phrase for a "=
painting")=2C it's also not chuvmey=2C so it's<br>>=3B listed a verb beca=
use it's a "verb phrase" that has a known meaning<br>>=3B and the verb pa=
rts can be conjugated normally (you could say jIDoq 'ej<br>>=3B jIwovbe')=
.<br><br>Ah. Are you only using the categories of noun=2C verb and chuvmey =
for everything? I guess I just find the use of the gloss "verb" to be too s=
implistic here. You're exactly right - it is possible to say jIDoq 'ej jIwo=
vbe' - but as you say above=2C they=2C not knowing how Klingon works=2C wou=
ld throw in Doq 'ej wovbe' thinking it's a complete verb phrase for brown. =
And they might be very tempted to conjugate it as such=2C with a prefix onl=
y on the first word.<br><br>>=3B As an advanced speaker of the language=
=2C you already know everything<br>>=3B there is to know about the phrase=
=2C so it has no negative impact on you<br>>=3B and others at your level =
when you see it. However=2C this "Word of the<br>>=3B Day" goes out to fa=
r more beginner speakers and those with a passing<br>>=3B interest in Kli=
ngon than it does to advanced speakers=2C so it's<br>>=3B tailored to giv=
e them the most information without overwhelming them.<br><br>I understand =
that=2C and that's why I think this entry is problematic. It oversimplifies=
matters on at least three separate points. And as you say=2C I'm an advanc=
ed speaker=2C so I can avoid the negative impacts of that oversimplificatio=
n. Those who are beginning speakers=2C or have only mild interest=2C aren't=
going to know what the problems are=2C and will be hit by all of them.<br>=
<br>>=3B If you can think of another way to share the Klingon phrase that=
means<br>>=3B "to be brown" in the same amount of space (140 chars=2C as=
it's sent<br>>=3B over twitter too)=2C then I'm more than willing to ree=
valuate this<br>>=3B entry.<br><br>"The" Klingon phrase that means "to be=
brown"? That's what my point is=2C really. I guess what I mean is that it'=
s not really what should appear in a Klingon Word of the Day. It's not a wo=
rd - it's a phrase=2C which makes it grammatically complicated=2C doubly so=
when verbs are involved - and it skates over a very complicated area of Kl=
ingon usage. It's hard enough for people to come to terms with the fact tha=
t Klingon has four colour terms corresponding to ten of ours=3B I don't thi=
nk it needs any further complexity. If you want to say that there's a singl=
e Klingon word for "be brown"=2C then it's Doq=2C as 'anan naHQun pointed o=
ut (my mistake - I thought the reference to it as meaning "be brown" was in=
KGT=2C but it's not=2C it's from HolQeD 8:1=2C p.7).<br><br>As an aside=2C=
the literature on colour terms is fascinating and definitely worth checkin=
g out.<br><br>QeS<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_c71234dc-854a-465f-94b5-5e3310c19ba6_--
--===============3111532478804060208==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============3111532478804060208==--
