[tlhIngan Hol] About colors

[Luciano Montanaro]

Thank you for your answers.

On Sat, Feb 16, 2019 at 12:00 PM De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 16 Feb 2019 at 10:26, Luciano Montanaro <mikelima at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have been reading the KGT section about visual arts.
>> I have some doubts, that probably many of you can clarify.
>>
>> The KGT explicitly says there is no word for color as such.
>>
>> But how can I ask what color is something?
>
>
> Doq'a'? SuD'a'?
>

I suppose that could work, depending on the situation.

>>
>> The nguv verb can be used, but it is not clear to me if it includes
>> naturally occurring colors, as the definition is "is dyed, is tinted, is
>> stained". What about the natural color of an object? Is
>>
>> chay' nguv tera' naran?
>>
>> still an option?
>
>
> I don't know if it can be used to describe the natural colour of an object, but I'd understand that question if you asked me.
>
> Also, consider the verbs {but} and {pargh}.
>

for natural or artificial? Ok... I guess, but with the limitation of
one adjective per name it would be difficult to work them in.


>>
>> Can I use to describe the color of something? The notes says it is rarely used,
>> but would something like this work?
>>
>> DaHjaj Doqqu' nguv tlhom!
>

Ah, right.

>
> What is the {nguv} doing there? You have two verbs in a sentence.
>
> {DaHjaj Doqqu' tlhom}
>
> We were told that a {tlhom} can be described as {chum}, so I see no reason why it can't be {Doqqu'}.
>
>> Regarding nguvmoH: the direct object is the thing being colored, can I use the
>> color as an indirect object?
>> Can it be used for natural processes?
>>
>> That is, is this a valid construct?
>>
>> Doqvad chal nguvmoH jajlo'.
>
>
> No, because {-vaD} is a noun suffix and {Doq} is a verb.
>

Right again, sorry.

>>
>> Well, I suppose I could use simply:
>>
>> chal DoqmoH jajlo'.
>>
>> Still, it would be nice if someone could confirm the meaning of an
>> indirect object with nguv.
>
>
> I'm fairly sure it doesn't work that way, based on other examples of {-vaD} with {-moH}.
>
> I'd say "to dye something red" like so:
> {ret'aq DoqmoHmeH nguvmoH}
> {ret'aq nguvmoHmo', DoqchoH}
>
>> An odd thing for me was that SuDqu' means green; I expected to be a color at
>> the opposite end of the spectrum, and to indicate blue.
>>
>> Anyway, that made me think of how to say yellow and orange instead;
>>
>> Would
>>
>> Doq dochvam, 'ach tlhoS SuD
>>
>> work for orange/orange yellow
>>
>> or
>>
>> SuD, 'ach tlhoS Doq
>>
>> for yellow, maybe close to orange?
>
>
> I understand those sentences, but they're descriptions, not labels.
>

Yes, but in the end, even doqqu' 'ej wov, "red, and light" is a description.
There are two problems, one is to find way to describe the color of an
object, and one to give an identifier to a colored pigment.

I am trying to do the former here... But I would like to see a klingon
paint shop, now that I think of it!


>>
>> The KGT indicates
>>
>> Sud 'ej wov
>>
>> for yellow, but it looks ambiguous... Could't it indicate light blue
>> or light green as well?
>
>
> It says it's a way to refer to a yellowish tinge. It's not a specific colour.
>
>>
>> Finally... grays.
>>
>> I have seen
>>
>> qIj 'ej wov
>>
>> to indicate gray. I suppose that works.
>>
>> Can I use
>>
>> chIs 'ach loQ Hurg/loQ wovbe'
>>
>> for
>>
>> light gray?
>
>
> I don't see why now. Again, these are descriptions. It's like saying in English, "it's white but slightly dark".
>

Well, yes it is a description. The intention is to say that you could
call it white, in a pinch, but it is really a darker shade.


> --
> De'vID
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org



-- 
Luciano Montanaro

Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on
no account be allowed to do the job. -- Douglas Adams