[tlhIngan Hol] does {-be'} negate the {-vIp} taboo?

Alan Anderson qunchuy at alcaco.net
Wed Apr 7 15:52:27 PDT 2021

On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 6:03 PM De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:

> In TKD 4.2.2, it says that: "This suffix [{-vIp}] is rarely used with a
> prefix meaning 'I' or 'we'. Though it is grammatically correct, it is
> culturally taboo."
> [...]
> It's not explicitly stated, but it seems to me that a statement like "I am
> not afraid to fight you" would not be culturally taboo to say for a
> Klingon. However, in a discussion with a skilled Klingon speaker, it came
> up that he believes that that statement is still culturally taboo because
> it satisfies the description in TKD 4.2.2. I think that this is one of
> those cases where the TKD is giving a sketch, and the reader is supposed to
> work out that the opposite of a taboo statement is not taboo, but
> admittedly there is no evidence to support this in TKD itself.
> What do others think?

I think negating the {-vIp} negates the taboo nature of using it in a first
person statement. I think applying TKD's proscription without taking the
{-be'} into account is unrealistic.

-- ghunchu'wI'
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20210407/cebc4c9c/attachment.html>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list