[98149] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Last X and testament?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick)
Sat Mar 8 23:06:53 2014
From: Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 14:06:24 +1000
In-Reply-To: <967C17DC-185F-4E9C-BA4F-E1FF7A7C2408@gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============0330998416204816034==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_f9cc8de4-50c8-42fa-b421-70b06a1585cb_"
--_f9cc8de4-50c8-42fa-b421-70b06a1585cb_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
ghItlhpu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv=2C jatlh:
> All of this assumes that Klingons would have a will.
I'm assuming nothing=2C merely asking how a Klingon would describe such a t=
hing in Klingon.
taH:
> Wouldn=92t it be more likely that when someone dies=2C everybody just fig=
hts over their stuff?
It is possible=2C but I doubt it. Klingon culture is heavily ceremonial whe=
n it comes to death=2C and the importance of heritage to Klingon society=2C=
coupled with the fact that Klingon legal terminology is otherwise relative=
ly well-developed (DIb=2C ghIpDIj=2C bo'DIj=2C meqba'=2C Hat=2C mab=2C qI'=
=2C mub=2C chut)=2C makes me think there are likely to be many complex lega=
l provisions in place for when someone dies.
> And who cares about commands left by a corpse? The whole idea is repugnan=
t.
Not left by a corpse: left by the person while their spirit ({qa'}) still i=
nhabited them=2C and as the spirit continues to survive after death=2C the =
wishes of the spirit should continue to be respected=2C I would think. We a=
lso know at least one proverb that indicates the actions of a Klingon spiri=
t would continue to be relevant after death: {qaStaHvIS wej puq poHmey vav=
puqloDpu' puqloDpu'chaj je quvHa'moH vav quvHa'ghach} "the dishonour of th=
e father dishonours his sons and their sons for three generations" (TKW p.1=
55).
> Next=2C you=92ll be looking for the word for =93funeral=94.
What=2C you mean {nol} "funeral" (TKD p.97)?
> {mol} is something one does to treasure=2C not to corpses.
With respect=2C "not to corpses" is absolutely wrong. {mol} is glossed in T=
KD as both "bury" and "grave" and if treasure were the intent then the glos=
s would surely have been "pit"=2C not "grave". Moreover=2C {mol} "grave" be=
ars the same relationship to {lom} "corpse" as {pogh} "glove" to {ghop} "ha=
nd"=2C so there's a potential etymological connection there as well that fu=
rther supports the idea that {mol} is first and foremost what is done to a =
corpse.
QeS
=
--_f9cc8de4-50c8-42fa-b421-70b06a1585cb_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt=3B
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>ghItlhpu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv=2C j=
atlh:<br>>=3B All of this assumes that Klingons would have a will.<br><br=
>I'm assuming nothing=2C merely asking how a Klingon would describe such a =
thing in Klingon.<br><br>taH:<br>>=3B Wouldn=92t it be more likely that w=
hen someone dies=2C everybody just fights over their stuff?<br><br>It is po=
ssible=2C but I doubt it. Klingon culture is heavily ceremonial when it com=
es to death=2C and the importance of heritage to Klingon society=2C coupled=
with the fact that Klingon legal terminology is otherwise relatively well-=
developed (DIb=2C ghIpDIj=2C bo'DIj=2C meqba'=2C Hat=2C mab=2C qI'=2C mub=
=2C chut)=2C makes me think there are likely to be many complex legal provi=
sions in place for when someone dies.<br><div><div><br></div><div>>=3B An=
d who cares about commands left by a corpse? The whole idea is repugnant.<b=
r><br>Not left by a corpse: left by the person while their spirit ({qa'}) s=
till inhabited them=2C and as the spirit continues to survive after death=
=2C the wishes of the spirit should continue to be respected=2C I would thi=
nk. We also know at least one proverb that indicates the actions of a Kling=
on spirit would continue to be relevant after death: =3B {qaStaHvIS wej=
puq poHmey vav puqloDpu' puqloDpu'chaj je quvHa'moH vav quvHa'ghach} "the =
dishonour of the father dishonours his sons and their sons for three genera=
tions" (TKW p.155).<br><br>>=3B Next=2C you=92ll be looking for the word =
for =93funeral=94.<br><br>What=2C you mean {nol} "funeral" (TKD p.97)?<br><=
br>>=3B {mol} is something one does to treasure=2C not to corpses.</div><=
br>With respect=2C "not to corpses" is absolutely wrong. {mol} is glossed i=
n TKD as both "bury" and "grave" and if treasure were the intent then the g=
loss would surely have been "pit"=2C not "grave". Moreover=2C {mol} "grave"=
bears the same relationship to {lom} "corpse" as {pogh} "glove" to {ghop} =
"hand"=2C so there's a potential etymological connection there as well that=
further supports the idea that {mol} is first and foremost what is done to=
a corpse.<br><br>QeS<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_f9cc8de4-50c8-42fa-b421-70b06a1585cb_--
--===============0330998416204816034==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============0330998416204816034==--
