[Tlhingan-hol] Close female friend of a male?

[Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh]

ghItlhpu' naHQun, jatlh:
> We have chaj and maqoch for close friends of the same gender, but no
> words for close friends of the opposite gender.

jang Quvar, jatlh:
> I first I had the idea to extend the meaning and "misuse" the word, but 
> now I just read in KGT that doing exactly this is not allowed:

Indeed. To do so is highly insulting.

taH:
> On the previous page, it is suggested to use {jupna'} for close friends, 
> "real friend, good friend".

Ah, yes! Thanks for reminding me of that passage.

> Using {-oy} on {jup} sounds wrong. Usually, only children use it, and 
> romantic partners use it in the {bang pong}.

With due respect, I think you're interpreting the KGT passage too restrictively. It focuses specifically on the way {-oy}-marked terms are used between parents and children. It says nothing about how, say, brothers and sisters might use {-oy} when referring to each other (and we know that it can be so used: {be'nI'oy} "sis", TKD p.174). In fact, TKD says that the term can be used not only with kinship terms, but even with nouns referring to pets. If pets are fair game for {-oy}, surely dear friends would be too.

Of course, they'd have to be *extremely* good friends to go beyond {jupna'}, but that's a matter of context. In my context, for instance, I'm still happy with using {jupoywI'}: the original Georgian is /dao asmat/ "o sister Asmat!". The use of not just a word for "friend", but an actual kinship term, implies an extremely close relationship that I don't think is well captured even by {jupna'}, but in a literal rendering as {be'nI'wI'}, the metaphor doesn't transfer well.

QeS
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20121130/f47ef901/attachment.html>