[tlhIngan Hol] describing baby animals

[SuStel]

On 10/13/2020 10:11 AM, Will Martin wrote:
> ngavyaw’ ghu = canine’s baby or baby of the canine = puppy
>
> ghu ngavyaw’ = baby’s canine or canine of the baby = baby’s pet

You forget the more general genitive interpretation of the noun-noun 
construction.

I'm not going to address this question directly, because /baby/ and 
/canine/ are both nouns and adjectives, and this confuses the 
translations. Instead, I'm going to translate an idea that deals 
strictly in nouns. How about a student who is a child?

*ghojwI' puq*/student child
/*puq ghojwI'*/child student/

Which is it? Is it a child (head noun) of the type /student/ (modifying 
noun)? Or is it a student (head noun) of the type /child/ (modifying noun)?

It's both. Either is correct. It's a child who is a student and a 
student who is a child.

So, completely ignoring semantics, is it

*ngavyaw' ghu*/canine baby
/or
*ghu ngavyaw'*/baby canine
/?

It's both. Either is correct. It's a baby that is a canine, and it's a 
canine that is a baby.


> *puppy* would be pronounced “poop-pee”, if it were pronounceable at 
> all, given the lack of vowel in the second syllable, since a {y} is 
> never a vowel in Klingon. There is no “uh” sound in Klingon, so it 
> would be difficult to transliterate without making it easily confused 
> with “poppy” *{papIy}*.

Qa'yIn was not proposing to transliterate the word /puppy,/ but instead 
keep it as a foreign word.

But on transliterating /puppy:/ remember that Klingon nouns tend to 
place stress on the final syllable of the root noun, so *papIy* would 
sound like "pa-PEE." You can add a glottal stop to draw the stress: 
*pa'pIy*//"PA-pee."


-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20201013/57ba2d1e/attachment-0016.htm>