<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/23/2020 3:24 PM, Lieven L. Litaer
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:128d2bf1-c3af-2c31-ebbc-868445b75a42@gmx.de">Am
23.04.2020 um 20:29 schrieb SuStel:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">puq lut n. fairy tale
<br>
puq lut rorgh n. fairy tale
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
[...]
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">See especially J.R.R. Tolkien's essay /On
Fairy Stories./ He would
<br>
object to calling fairy tales /child-stories/ the way Klingon
does.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Oh, yes - that is true. And I think there is no reason to see this
as a
<br>
set phrase. Note that Okrand gave all these as "I'd probably go
with A
<br>
or B or C." so it looks like you can - or even have to - choose
<br>
depending on context.
<br>
<br>
In addition, {lut rorgh} indicates nothing about children, so also
not a
<br>
fairy tale in the sense of "children bedtimes tory". Basically a
{lut
<br>
rorgh} can be any kind of story.
<br>
<br>
One might even say that Okrand didn't give us a word for "fairy
tale",
<br>
only a suggestion to describe the idea.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>But they will be listed on everyone's word lists, including our
old friend boQwI', as <i>the</i> translations for <i>fairy tale,</i>
not just convenient descriptions Okrand tried out.</p>
<p>Okrand did not give us just <b>lut rorgh.</b> Both of his
translations involve <b>puq.</b> A child making up a story about
how a strange man entered the kitchen and ate all the cookies is a
<b>lut rorgh</b> — even a <b>puq lut rorgh</b> — but not a fairy
tale.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>