[tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: cheH

[mayqel qunenoS]

lieven:
> Anyway, I would stick to the first definition magh = "betray

I agree. I think, that it would be very difficult/close to impossible for
someone reading {magh} to actually think "work against", instead {betray}.

Sticking to the strictest interpretation of canon, is the only way to
assure, that while using the language, we are able to actually understand
each other.

qunnoq







On 14 Aug 2017 10:08 pm, "Lieven" <levinius at gmx.de> wrote:

> Am 14.08.2017 um 20:58 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
>
>> So, with regards to the "act against" translation of {magh}, we can't be
>> certain that it's 100% 'oqranD-approved, right ?
>>
>
> If you take it very exact, than yes.
>
> It seems obvious that the English was there first. When okrand had to
> tanslate it, he searched for a suitable word. Since there was no word
> meaning "act against", he probably thought like "that's quite the same as
> betraying someone", so he picked that word instead. It didn't really change
> the meaning of the phrase.
>
> It's like many people like to use the word {targh} for "dog". It's not
> correct, but conveys the idea.
>
> Anyway, I would stick to the first definition magh = "betray" and regard
> the other translation as a clue on how one could use the word. After all,
> working against somebody that you are supposed to help is betraying. But
> {magh} is not work against /anyone/.
>
>
> --
> Lieven L. Litaer
> aka Quvar valer 'utlh
> Grammarian of the KLI
> http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
> http://www.klingonwiki.net
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170814/98726407/attachment-0017.htm>