[tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: vung

[nIqolay Q]

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> Very good! So does *vungbogh muD* refer to only that section of the
> atmosphere that is hurricaning? When one says *SIS muD,* one is not
> talking about the part of the atmosphere that is raining as a thing
> discrete from the rest.
>
Maybe not, but if someone used *SISbogh muD* instead, I would expect they
were talking about the atmosphere that is raining as opposed to the part
that is not. Otherwise, why mention the rain at all?

Do you think we can say *SuS vung muD*? We can say *pey SIS **it rained
> acid**,* as per the above. And if we can, can we also still say *vung SuS*
> ?


I don't know if *SuS vung muD* is legitimate, although if it is, it's
probably as redundant as saying *bIQ SIS*. It seems like your underlying
question here is something along the lines of "is wind the subject or
object of 'hurricaning'?" You could interpret the wind as the result of a
larger atmospheric system, which would suggest using *SuS vung muD* or
just *vung
muD*. The winds themselves are also a major part of what drives a hurricane
internally, which suggests *vung SuS* would also be reasonable. Granted,
the winds themselves don't generate the rain (which I think is what you
were getting at with "Can the *SuS* do *SIS*?" question), except maybe in
the broad sense that they can circulate moist air within the system, so
*muD* is probably preferable as the subject if you want scientific
precision. *SuS* or *SuS'a'* aren't entirely unreasonable subjects, though,
and might be preferable if you want to focus on the hurricane's winds or if
you want an evocative noun instead of a precise one.

Also, going back to my original question, I remembered Okrand's translation
of Sonnet 116 mentions some weather (his Klingon and his English):

> *jevqu'taHvIS muD ral, bejlI' parmaq.
> Qombe'! nISbe' jevwI', 'ej not ruS baq.*
> [...]
> *While the violent atmosphere storms, love still watches.
> It does not tremble! The storm does not disrupt it, and it never terminates the bond.*
>
> Which suggests that *muD* is a reasonable explicit subject for weather
verbs, and that *-wI'* can be used to refer to weather verbs as discrete
systems (so *vungwI'* would then be a way to talk about hurricanes as
nouns).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170929/f09627d7/attachment-0002.htm>