[tlhIngan Hol] new word {pal'ar} "kinsperson, family member"

[Iikka Hauhio]

What is the difference between pal'ar and chuD "people, kin, members of the same tribe/clan"? It seems that both could be used to refer to the relatives of a person.

Iikka "fergusq" Hauhio
------- Original Message -------
On Friday, May 27th, 2022 at 07.22, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:

> In the first edition of the paq'batlh, the word {qorDu'} was used in some places to translate "kin", including sometimes using the suffixes {-wI'} and {-lI'}. Dr. Okrand confirmed that this is an error as (normally) a family is not a being capable of language. However, its members might be, for which he provided a new word. (I'd posted an earlier conservation I had with Dr. Okrand about some of this back in March, in a post with the subject "inherently plural nouns and collection nouns for groups of people (in the paq'batlh)".)
>
> The following was in response to my observation that "kin" wasn't translated consistently throughout the paq'batlh (in an intermediate draft of the 2nd edition). I've edited his message slightly to add context (his original message only had the page and line numbers and not the quotations) and remove some comments not relevant to the topic of this message, with my edits in [brackets].
>
> MO:
>>>> I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the word “kin” in the English translations is, except for once, not used for family in general or family as a unit, but rather to refer to one person (Kahless’s brother or father) or sometimes two (brother and father) or maybe more — that is, it’s equivalent to “kinsperson” (if that’s a good English word) or “kinspersons.” When “kin” is referring to family in general or the family as a unit (not a collection of individuals), {qorDu’} is definitely correct. But {qorDu’} doesn’t seem right when referring to one or a number of family members. A better word for that is {pal’ar}.
>
> More specifically:
>
> [(p. 61, line 12) {batlh Hegh qorDu'lI'} "your kin will die with honor"]
> Change {qorDu’lIj} to {pal’arpu’lI’}. The idea is that a bunch of family members will die, not that the family will no longer exist. (It’s also odd for a “family” — distinct from the members of a family — to die.)
>
> [(p. 63, line 13) {qorDu'Daj lon} "He leaves his kin"]
> Same deal. Morath is going away from where his family members are, so change {qorDu’Daj} to {pal’arpu’Daj).
>
> [(p. 71, line 2) {ghobchuq vavwI' loDnI' je} "battle between my kin"]
> Here English “my kin” (p. 70) is specific in Klingon ({vavwI’ loDnI’ je}. A {-wI’} seems to be missing after {loDnI’}, but rather than stick in that {-wI’}, we should change the phrase to {pal’arpu’wI’} to match the English.
>
> [(p. 87, line 14) {qorDu'wI' vIQan} "I will save my kin"]
> Change {qorDu’wIj} to {pal’arpu’wI’}. Here again “kin” means specifically Kahless’s father and brother.
>
> [(p. 107, line 5) {qeylIS qorDu' je} "Kahless and his kin"]
> Change {qorDu’} to {pal’arpu’Daj}. [snip] “kin” in this passage is referring only to Kanjit and Morath.
>
> [(p. 183, line 3) {qorDu'wIj vImuv} "to be with my kin"]
> Change {qorDu’wIj} to {pal’arpu’wI’}. (Same comment as for p. 107 [referring to the fact that "kin" refers to Kanjit and Morath].)
>
> [(p. 191, line 33) {qeylIS qorDu' je} "with his kin"]
> Change {qorDu’} to {pal’arpu’Daj}.
>
> [(p. 195, line 1) {vavlI' loDnI'lI' je DaSammeH} "in search of your kin"]
> Which brings us to p. 195, which was what prompted the question in the first place. I think, for consistency, it would be good to change {vavlI’ loDnI’lI’ je} to {pal’arpu’lI’}.
>
> {qorDu’} on p. 145 is used in the phrase “family honor,” which is fine. No reference to individual family members.
> (end of message)
>
> --
>
> De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220527/4d9b7339/attachment-0002.htm>