[tlhIngan Hol] Relevance of language ability to third person singular pronouns

Lieven L. Litaer levinius at gmx.de
Mon Sep 10 22:45:39 PDT 2018

Am 10.09.2018 um 22:23 schrieb SuStel:
> So lemme get this straight. You guys think that *ghaH* is for any 
> singular thing the speaker believes can communicate in some way,

Although I think this is a very interesting discussion pointing at 
something that is not 100% clearly defined in TKD, I still think that it 
is quite clear depending on how you interpret things.

For me, the {ghaH/'oH} pair is identical in use as the {chaH/bIH}: One 
is for capable of language, the other is for things.

[First, a sidenote: I know we can never assume Klingon works like 
English, but here I'm talking about the English terms, not the Klingon's]

It's true that Okrand did not explicetly say that in TKD, but the usage 
of the English words still makes it clear: Any English reader knows the 
difference between "s/he" and "it". But there is only one kind of "they" 
in English, and that's why there is the additional explanation in TKD.

In addition of possible confusion, Conversational Klingon makes the 
distinction "referring to beings". You may argue that animals are beings 
as well, but that would contradict the rule of TKD that says capable of 

And I would not take Okrands message about what you BELIEVE too strict. 
This incorrect usage of pronouns is also based on the English usage (and 
this time I'm saying that, because all those languages who have genders 
for things do not have that problem). I read that message like "if you 
want to use ghaH with your dog, then do it." And qurgh mentioned 
creatures, not things.

Lieven L. Litaer
aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany"

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list