[Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: Doq 'ej wovbe'

[Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh]

jIjatlhpu':
> I was going to keep my trap shut, but I'm glad someone else has raised this.
> With all due respect to qurgh, and not wanting to sound like a pedantic old
> curmudgeon ('coz it's led to fiery confrontation before and I don't want
> that), Doq 'ej wovbe' isn't a verb;

mujang qurgh, jatlh:
> But "be brown" is a verb

No, 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, 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, doesn't that ultimately mean that it actually becomes an English word of the day, with a Klingon gloss? 

> If it was listed as a noun they, not knowing how Klingon works, 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, either. I didn't mean to imply that it is.

> (the way nagh beQ is a phrase for a "painting"), it's also not chuvmey, 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, verb and chuvmey for everything? 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' - but as you say above, they, not knowing how Klingon works, 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, with a prefix only on the first word.

> As an advanced speaker of the language, you already know everything
> there is to know about the phrase, so it has no negative impact on you
> and others at your level when you see it. However, 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, so it's
> tailored to give them the most information without overwhelming them.

I understand that, and that's why I think this entry is problematic. It oversimplifies matters on at least three separate points. And as you say, I'm an advanced speaker, so I can avoid the negative impacts of that oversimplification. Those who are beginning speakers, or have only mild interest, aren't going to know what the problems are, 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, as it's sent
> over twitter too), then I'm more than willing to reevaluate this
> entry.

"The" Klingon phrase that means "to be brown"? That's what my point is, 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 word - it's a phrase, which makes it grammatically complicated, doubly so when verbs are involved - and it skates over a very complicated area of Klingon usage. It's hard enough for people to come to terms with the fact that Klingon has four colour terms corresponding to ten of ours; I don't think it needs any further complexity. If you want to say that there's a single Klingon word for "be brown", then it's Doq, as 'anan naHQun pointed out (my mistake - I thought the reference to it as meaning "be brown" was in KGT, but it's not, it's from HolQeD 8:1, p.7).

As an aside, the literature on colour terms is fascinating and definitely worth checking out.

QeS
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20121016/90e470fd/attachment.html>