[98151] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Last X and testament?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh)
Sat Mar 8 23:35:45 2014
From: lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
Resent-From: lojmIt tI'wI' nuv 'utlh <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BAY179-W48778323FEC2008B026E8AA750@phx.gbl>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 23:34:10 -0500
Resent-To: Klingon Mailing List <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
To: Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============8693361474745680392==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A43AE1B1-B446-443F-A251-BF88382A66BF"
--Apple-Mail=_A43AE1B1-B446-443F-A251-BF88382A66BF
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
I feel certain that one of the functions of every House is to defend the =
interests of the House, including the property of all who die within it. =
I would not expect lawyers to be involved.
There=92s never been a suggestion that any Klingon feels debt to follow =
the orders of the dead. The whole point of winning a contest to the =
death is to be the guy still standing who gets to tell others what to =
do. When you lose such a contest, your pre-posthumus wishes don=92t =
linger longer than you did.
Succession is more important than property rights, since those who =
succeed make choices as to who defends what property for whom. If a =
successor has challengers and the challenger wins, then there is a new =
successor, regardless of the wishes of the original leader.
Who would defend the rights of orphans and widows and widowers? The =
House, not the law. Hold up a Last Will and Testament to someone =
grabbing property of someone recently departed and you=92ll likely get =
the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid response to =93Rules? In a knife =
fight?"
lojmIt tI=92wI=92 nuv =91utlh
Door Repair Guy, Retired Honorably
On Mar 8, 2014, at 11:06 PM, Rohan Fenwick <qeslagh@hotmail.com> wrote:
> ghItlhpu' lojmIt tI'wI' nuv, jatlh:
> > All of this assumes that Klingons would have a will.
>=20
> I'm assuming nothing, merely asking how a Klingon would describe such =
a thing in Klingon.
>=20
> taH:
> > Wouldn=92t it be more likely that when someone dies, everybody just =
fights over their stuff?
>=20
> It is possible, but I doubt it. Klingon culture is heavily ceremonial =
when it comes to death, and the importance of heritage to Klingon =
society, coupled with the fact that Klingon legal terminology is =
otherwise relatively well-developed (DIb, ghIpDIj, bo'DIj, meqba', Hat, =
mab, qI', mub, chut), makes me think there are likely to be many complex =
legal provisions in place for when someone dies.
>=20
> > And who cares about commands left by a corpse? The whole idea is =
repugnant.
>=20
> Not left by a corpse: left by the person while their spirit ({qa'}) =
still inhabited them, and as the spirit continues to survive after =
death, the wishes of the spirit should continue to be respected, I would =
think. We also know at least one proverb that indicates the actions of a =
Klingon spirit would continue to be relevant after death: {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 generations" (TKW p.155).
>=20
> > Next, you=92ll be looking for the word for =93funeral=94.
>=20
> What, you mean {nol} "funeral" (TKD p.97)?
>=20
> > {mol} is something one does to treasure, not to corpses.
>=20
> With respect, "not to corpses" is absolutely wrong. {mol} is glossed =
in TKD as both "bury" and "grave" and if treasure were the intent then =
the gloss would surely have been "pit", not "grave". Moreover, {mol} =
"grave" bears the same relationship to {lom} "corpse" as {pogh} "glove" =
to {ghop} "hand", 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.
>=20
> QeS
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--Apple-Mail=_A43AE1B1-B446-443F-A251-BF88382A66BF
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=windows-1252
<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><meta =
http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>I =
feel certain that one of the functions of every House is to defend the =
interests of the House, including the property of all who die within it. =
I would not expect lawyers to be =
involved.</div><div><br></div><div>There=92s never been a suggestion =
that any Klingon feels debt to follow the orders of the dead. The whole =
point of winning a contest to the death is to be the guy still standing =
who gets to tell others what to do. When you lose such a contest, your =
pre-posthumus wishes don=92t linger longer than you =
did.</div><div><br></div><div>Succession is more important than property =
rights, since those who succeed make choices as to who defends what =
property for whom. If a successor has challengers and the challenger =
wins, then there is a new successor, regardless of the wishes of the =
original leader.</div><div><br></div><div>Who would defend the rights of =
orphans and widows and widowers? The House, not the law. Hold up a Last =
Will and Testament to someone grabbing property of someone recently =
departed and you=92ll likely get the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid =
response to =93Rules? In a knife fight?"</div><br><div>
<div><div>lojmIt tI=92wI=92 nuv =91utlh</div><div>Door Repair Guy, =
Retired Honorably</div></div><div><br></div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br><div><div>On Mar 8, 2014, at 11:06 PM, Rohan Fenwick <<a =
href=3D"mailto:qeslagh@hotmail.com">qeslagh@hotmail.com</a>> =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"hmmessage" style=3D"font-size: 12pt; =
font-family: Calibri; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: =
none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"><div dir=3D"ltr">ghItlhpu' lojmIt =
tI'wI' nuv, jatlh:<br>> All of this assumes that Klingons would have =
a will.<br><br>I'm assuming nothing, merely asking how a Klingon would =
describe such a thing in Klingon.<br><br>taH:<br>> Wouldn=92t it be =
more likely that when someone dies, everybody just fights over their =
stuff?<br><br>It is possible, but I doubt it. Klingon culture is heavily =
ceremonial when it comes to death, and the importance of heritage to =
Klingon society, coupled with the fact that Klingon legal terminology is =
otherwise relatively well-developed (DIb, ghIpDIj, bo'DIj, meqba', Hat, =
mab, qI', mub, chut), makes me think there are likely to be many complex =
legal provisions in place for when someone =
dies.<br><div><div><br></div><div>> And who cares about commands left =
by a corpse? The whole idea is repugnant.<br><br>Not left by a corpse: =
left by the person while their spirit ({qa'}) still inhabited them, and =
as the spirit continues to survive after death, the wishes of the spirit =
should continue to be respected, I would think. We also know at least =
one proverb that indicates the actions of a Klingon spirit would =
continue to be relevant after death: {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 generations" =
(TKW p.155).<br><br>> Next, you=92ll be looking for the word for =
=93funeral=94.<br><br>What, you mean {nol} "funeral" (TKD =
p.97)?<br><br>> {mol} is something one does to treasure, not to =
corpses.</div><br>With respect, "not to corpses" is absolutely wrong. =
{mol} is glossed in TKD as both "bury" and "grave" and if treasure were =
the intent then the gloss would surely have been "pit", not "grave". =
Moreover, {mol} "grave" bears the same relationship to {lom} "corpse" as =
{pogh} "glove" to {ghop} "hand", 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>________________________________________=
_______<br>Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br><a =
href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br><a =
href=3D"http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol">http://mail.kli=
.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a></div></blockquote></div><br></div><=
/body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_A43AE1B1-B446-443F-A251-BF88382A66BF--
--===============8693361474745680392==
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
--===============8693361474745680392==--
