[Tlhingan-hol] qIHpu'ghach wa'DIch: 'ay' cha'

[Felix Malmenbeck]

> maghoHtaH 'e' wItIvlaw' neH!

jIQochbe'. maghoHtaH 'e' vItIvqu'.

> Oh, absolutely, and remember also that size is not the only factor (or even
> always *a* qualifying factor) in justifying the use of {-'a'}. A mIv'a', for
> instance, would probably always be smaller and made of less material than a
> mIv.

Very true. That's why I believe a Borg Tactical Cube could be called a Borg ngogh'a' or Borg ngogh Duj'a', even though I don't think it's much larger than a regular Borg Cube. Even a Borg Diamond could perhaps be given this title, in spite of it being quite a lot smaller than a Borg Cube (at least as far as I can tell).

> Let me argue by analogy with {-Hom}. If a Klingon were to say {romuluS wo'
> rojHom} "the Romulan Empire truce", I don't think it implies the Romulans
> and the Klingons have previously had {roj} at all, or even that they expect
> to ever have one. As such, I don't think it makes sense to analyse {romuluS
> wo' rojHom} as [romuluS wo' roj][Hom], implying that it's one little period
> of Romulan peace among many periods of Romulan peace. It only implies that
> it's one minor period of peace among many other periods of peace; none of
> the others need be with the Romulans.

A very good point. However, I believe this has more to do with the fact that one has a decent idea of what constitutes a roj'a' vs. a rojHom by comparison with peaces with other species, so the rojHom comes by considering all the different peaces one could theoretically have with the Romulans.
For ngoghmey, however, I don't think there is any such measure. Blocks and lumps range from the microscopic to the gargantuan, from the worthless to those containing latinum or armed with quantum torpedoes, and dividing them all up into just three categories just seems senseless to me; make -'a' and -Hom apply within categories rather than by some universal measure, and I think we'll have a far richer language.

That being said, this being a natural language (from an in-universe perspective), I would expect there to be exception. The existence of a lIghon Qa'Hom does not assume the existence of a lIghon Qa' or a lIghon Qa''a'. Rather, it's a Ligonian animal very similar to the Qo'noS Qa'Hom but quite dissimilar from the Qo'noS Qa', so it borrows the whole name rather than just the stem.

________________________________________
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh [qeslagh at hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 04:57
To: tlhingan-hol at kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] qIHpu'ghach wa'DIch: 'ay' cha'

jatlh Qov:

> Has someone already suggested {borgh ngogh Duj'a'} and {borgh moQ Duj'a'}?



ghobe'; lI'bej bIH. (maghoHtaH 'e' wItIvlaw' neH!)

QeS 'utlh

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol