[tlhIngan Hol] law' puS with the -taHvIS and type-9 clauses preceding each element

Will Martin willmartin2 at mac.com
Mon Feb 15 17:09:17 PST 2021

You’ve missed my point. Analysis of a Replacement Proverb is probably futile because it may very well be gibberish that lost its meaning thousands of years ago. We can process the words, shoving them through the algorithm of translation and not actually translate the meaning into anything… meaningful.

I was trying to come up with something meaningful. My bad. 

I retract my earlier analysis, since I was leaning in toward something meaningful instead of leaning in toward something literal.

It could very well mean, “On another person’s face [the fire is hottest.” And we might not really understand what that means, being perhaps a reference to a story long ago forgotten.

In English, when an atheist hears someone sneeze, they might very well say, “Bless you,” out of habit/courtesy or “Ga-Zoon-Height”, even if they don’t know German. This might be like that.

Note that we’re not really told that {X Q law’ X Hoch puS} means X is "Q-er than everything.” We’re told that it means “X is Q-est.” It may look like a comparative, but it’s actually a superlative. It’s not really “The fire is hotter than everything.” It’s “The fire is hottest.” It looks like it’s saying, “The fire is hotter than everything,” but that’s the logical/literal translation, as opposed to a more accurate translation of what we are told it means in Klingon.

… Not that it makes TOO much difference.

charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan

rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.

> On Feb 13, 2021, at 3:25 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com <mailto:de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com>> wrote:
> TL;DR: You've shown that in other known canon instances of the comparative (except for {Qam[taH]vIS...}), the context in front applies to the entire comparative. Your own analysis of your interpretation of the proverb {reH latlh qabDaq qul tuj law' Hoch tuj puS}, however, differs from your analysis of the other sentences, and actually applies {latlh qabDaq} only to the first half. (The only way the fire on someone else's face could be being compared to things not on that face is if {Hoch} is outside the scope of {latlh qabDaq}.) You're holding two mutually incompatible beliefs. Your explanation of the grammar of the other sentences differs from your explanation of this one, and so a reasonable conclusion is that this sentence is an exception to the others.

TL;CR (Too Long; Can’t Resend).

The list rejected my reply because adding my short messaget to your long one exceeded the technical limit for a message sent to the list.

So, you can look at earlier messages in the thread to find what I was responding to.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20210215/07625abc/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list