Anyone who has watched Discovery might have noticed that Lorca is sensitive to light. In another scene, Burnham said that the light is different where she is. These are two different things: Marc Okrand wrote: ---begin quote------------------------------ For this, {'otlh} "photon" would work, but even though it's scientifically correct (I think), it would be confusing in a Star Trek context because of photon torpedoes and such (and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum). You're right — Klingons would have a word (at least a scientific, technical term) for the phenomenon of light (aside from {'otlh}). {wovtaHghach} is one such word. Another is {tamghay} "light, luminescence, illumination" ("illumination" here does not mean "clarification, explanation, explication" or the like). ---end quote------------------------------ Okrand later added: ---begin quote------------------------------ You're right. They are different (and, like you, I'd use {tamghay} for the examples you sent), but one's eyes could be sensitive to {wovtaHghach}. For "the light is different," however, {wovtaHghach} isn't so good (unless they're talking about the intensity of the brightness or something like that as opposed to, say, the color). ---end quote------------------------------ So when saying that Lorca is sensitive to "light", it's actually the {wovtaHghach} bothering him. Otherwise, he would have to live in absolute darkness, where there is no {tamghay}. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/DSC111
Dajqu'!
(and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum)
I wonder if this should be taken to mean that {tamghay} normally refers only to visible light, rather than the full EM spectrum. Or perhaps it's context-dependent, like it is in English (with the everyday definition being just the visible parts while within many scientific fields it'd be the full spectrum). //loghaD ________________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> Sent: Friday, January 26, 2018 21:20 To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Subject: [tlhIngan Hol] Maltz about light Anyone who has watched Discovery might have noticed that Lorca is sensitive to light. In another scene, Burnham said that the light is different where she is. These are two different things: Marc Okrand wrote: ---begin quote------------------------------ For this, {'otlh} "photon" would work, but even though it's scientifically correct (I think), it would be confusing in a Star Trek context because of photon torpedoes and such (and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum). You're right — Klingons would have a word (at least a scientific, technical term) for the phenomenon of light (aside from {'otlh}). {wovtaHghach} is one such word. Another is {tamghay} "light, luminescence, illumination" ("illumination" here does not mean "clarification, explanation, explication" or the like). ---end quote------------------------------ Okrand later added: ---begin quote------------------------------ You're right. They are different (and, like you, I'd use {tamghay} for the examples you sent), but one's eyes could be sensitive to {wovtaHghach}. For "the light is different," however, {wovtaHghach} isn't so good (unless they're talking about the intensity of the brightness or something like that as opposed to, say, the color). ---end quote------------------------------ So when saying that Lorca is sensitive to "light", it's actually the {wovtaHghach} bothering him. Otherwise, he would have to live in absolute darkness, where there is no {tamghay}. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/DSC111 _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se> wrote:
Dajqu'!
(and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum)
I wonder if this should be taken to mean that {tamghay} normally refers only to visible light, rather than the full EM spectrum. Or perhaps it's context-dependent, like it is in English (with the everyday definition being just the visible parts while within many scientific fields it'd be the full spectrum).
Based on the context and the usual meanings of the English glosses, it seems likely that {tamghay} normally means visible light. Lieven: Roughly speaking, it seems like {wovtaHghach} can be taken to mean "the state of having a lot of {tamghay}". Is this correct? Did Okrand talk more about the use of {'otlh} for light? Up till now, the use of {'otlh} in paq'batlh was the only time we had a noun for "light" as a phenomenon.
[offlist] It would be good if you sent the part about {tamghay wovHa'} rather than {tamghay Hurgh}, if you can make it public. On 26 January 2018 at 21:20, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Anyone who has watched Discovery might have noticed that Lorca is sensitive to light. In another scene, Burnham said that the light is different where she is. These are two different things:
Marc Okrand wrote: ---begin quote------------------------------ For this, {'otlh} "photon" would work, but even though it's scientifically correct (I think), it would be confusing in a Star Trek context because of photon torpedoes and such (and because there can be photons besides those in the visible light part of the electromagnetic spectrum). You're right — Klingons would have a word (at least a scientific, technical term) for the phenomenon of light (aside from {'otlh}).
{wovtaHghach} is one such word. Another is {tamghay} "light, luminescence, illumination" ("illumination" here does not mean "clarification, explanation, explication" or the like). ---end quote------------------------------
Okrand later added: ---begin quote------------------------------ You're right. They are different (and, like you, I'd use {tamghay} for the examples you sent), but one's eyes could be sensitive to {wovtaHghach}. For "the light is different," however, {wovtaHghach} isn't so good (unless they're talking about the intensity of the brightness or something like that as opposed to, say, the color). ---end quote------------------------------
So when saying that Lorca is sensitive to "light", it's actually the {wovtaHghach} bothering him. Otherwise, he would have to live in absolute darkness, where there is no {tamghay}.
-- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/DSC111 _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
-- De'vID
Am 29.01.2018 um 10:06 schrieb De'vID:
It would be good if you sent the part about {tamghay wovHa'} rather than {tamghay Hurgh}, if you can make it public.
D'oh, I meant to send this to Lieven only. :-p
No problem, here's what I wanted to use as a reply to another mail. I just forgot to add this info to my first message. Quote from Okrand: ----- {tamghay Hurgh} sounds odd to me for some reason. I think it would be {tamghay wovHa'}, which perhaps could be translated as "dim light." ---- -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Maltz
I don't understand. {wovtaHghach} means "light" only, or does it also mean "luminescence, illumination" as well ? ~ nI'ghma On Jan 29, 2018 11:34 AM, "Lieven L. Litaer" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 29.01.2018 um 10:06 schrieb De'vID:
It would be good if you sent the part about {tamghay wovHa'} rather than {tamghay Hurgh}, if you can make it public.
D'oh, I meant to send this to Lieven only. :-p
No problem, here's what I wanted to use as a reply to another mail. I just forgot to add this info to my first message.
Quote from Okrand: ----- {tamghay Hurgh} sounds odd to me for some reason. I think it would be {tamghay wovHa'}, which perhaps could be translated as "dim light." ----
-- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Maltz _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Am 30.01.2018 um 10:51 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
I don't understand.
{wovtaHghach} means "light" only, or does it also mean "luminescence, illumination" as well ?
Neither of them. You can analyze it literally as "brightness". When Captain Lorca says "the light hurts my eyes", he is referring to the light being bright. Late at night for instance, there still is light, but it's not very bright. It's okay then. So he is not allergic to the light itself, on the bright light. Taken literal, the word {wovtaHghach} could even refer to the intensity of a color. The term {tamghay} is defined as "light, luminescence, illumination". This one is the real "light", the thing emitted by a lamp, or the sun. And I'm sure you can even combine those two: {tamghay wovtaHghach} "the brightness of the light". Maybe this last shows the difference. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/StarTrekDiscovery
participants (5)
-
De'vID -
Felix Malmenbeck -
Lieven L. Litaer -
mayqel qunenoS -
nIqolay Q