On 11/27/2019 9:05 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
Suppose you have a full-grown (or is it fully-grown ?),
Either.
german shepherd.
Would you characterize it as {qovIj} or a {ngavyaw'} ?
I'd characterize it as a /dog/ or /German shepherd./ If I had to name the closest Klingon equivalent, it probably doesn't matter whether I pick *qovIj* or *ngavyaw',* since it's neither. If I had to pick one... it'd be tough, since I don't really see much of a size difference between Kruge's pet and the animals seen on Rura Pente, which is what we're told the difference between a *qovIj* and a *ngavyaw'* is. Kruge's *qovIj* has much less fur than the Rura Pente beasts, while the Rura Pente beasts have tusks that the monster dog doesn't have. For simplicity I'd probably call all little drop-kicks *qovIj* and use *ngavyaw'* for big dogs. But I don't think this is ideal.
And lets say, you have a {ngavyaw'} puppy..
Would you characterize it, as a {ngavyaw'} or a {qovIj} ?
Or would you play it safe, and say {ngavyaw' ghu} ?
And, to take this to the limit..
If you had a {qovIj} which took steroids and grew the size of a small car, how would you say it ?
On the contrary, if a {ngavyaw'}, matured chronologically, never attaining the expected size, but remained very small, would you still call it a {ngavyaw'} ?
I think *qovIj* and *ngavyaw'* are names of specific species, so it doesn't matter whether they're immature or stunted. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name