[tlhIngan Hol] [The Little Prince] Is {DI'raq} "sheep" new canon?

[Daniel Dadap]

> On Sep 1, 2018, at 03:33, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> Basically, it'S like in English (or French, German) that a {DI'raq} refers to the animal itself, no matter which gender, and you can add the gender to distinguish.
> 
> I'm sure that applies to other animals as well.
> 

I think my question was whether “DI'raq motlh” implies that an ordinary sheep is a ewe. The original line “that’s not a sheep; that’s a ram” seems to make this sort of implication. Perhaps in a way an ordinary sheep is a ewe, since I imagine that most shepherds keep far more ewes than rams.

>> By analogy, would DI'raq be' be a ewe?
> 
> No, the ewe is a {DI'raq be'}.

How is that different from what I asked?