[tlhIngan Hol] Don't they have jay' arrows ?

[Ed Bailey]

I think I was pretty clear when I said, "If the play is from before {cha}
and {pu'} had their modern meanings." Or are we not allowed to speculate?
~mIp'av

On Wednesday, July 19, 2017, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 7/19/2017 1:46 PM, Ed Bailey wrote:
>
> If the play is from before {cha} and {pu'} had their modern meanings,
maybe it's not a dodge after all. Perhaps these words translate at least
roughly from no' Hol as "slings" and "arrows," and are connected to the
irregular plural of {peng} and the {pu'} in {DaSpu'}.
>
> First, let's remember that Hamlet is not by Okrand; it's not canonical.
Don't go crazy trying to work this into your personal understanding of
Klingon.
>
> Then, for those who haven't read it, know that Hamlet is given a
backstory in its introduction: it's actually a fairly modern Klingon play,
written by a Klingon after Klingons have achieved spaceflight and
apparently after contact with the Federation. But the sneaky Federation has
waged a propaganda war against the Klingon Empire and created a false
history of Earth literature, in which Shex'pir was actually a human from
many centuries earlier, so it's hard to go and find proof that this isn't
true. This edition of Hamlet is an attempt to counter this propaganda and
"reconstruct" what the original Klingon must have looked like.
>
> So when Hamlet says cha pu' je, you should take it literally and in its
modern sense.
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170719/f2299a57/attachment-0016.htm>