In September, there was a discussion on Facebook whether it makes sense to say {qul lIng} "produce a fire". Some suggested this word, while others said that if your produce something, there must be a remaining product, so {lIng} might not be the best choice. During our preparation for the coming qepHom, Marc Okrand had a chance to forward our question to Maltz, and his answer somehow made both our suggestions be right. He wrote: You can {lIng} a fire, but you’re more likely to {chenmoH} or {vemmoH} it. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.tlhInganHol.com http://klingon.wiki/En/NewWordsQepHom2023
On 10/14/2023 12:12 PM, Lieven L. Litaer via tlhIngan-Hol wrote:
In September, there was a discussion on Facebook whether it makes sense to say {qul lIng} "produce a fire". Some suggested this word, while others said that if your produce something, there must be a remaining product, so {lIng} might not be the best choice.
During our preparation for the coming qepHom, Marc Okrand had a chance to forward our question to Maltz, and his answer somehow made both our suggestions be right. He wrote:
You can {lIng} a fire, but you’re more likely to {chenmoH} or {vemmoH} it.
Odd that this was a question at all, since we already knew you can *qul chu'* /light the fire./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Sat, 2023-10-14 at 12:19 -0400, SuStel via tlhIngan-Hol wrote:
On 10/14/2023 12:12 PM, Lieven L. Litaer via tlhIngan-Hol wrote:
In September, there was a discussion on Facebook whether it makes sense to say {qul lIng} "produce a fire". Some suggested this word, while others said that if your produce something, there must be a remaining product, so {lIng} might not be the best choice.
During our preparation for the coming qepHom, Marc Okrand had a chance to forward our question to Maltz, and his answer somehow made both our suggestions be right. He wrote:
You can {lIng} a fire, but you’re more likely to {chenmoH} or {vemmoH} it.
Odd that this was a question at all, since we already knew you can *qul chu'* /light the fire./
I'm a little confused. vemmoH for light a fire came out back in 2020. And where does qul chu' come from? paq-batlh has qul wIchenmoH. - DloraH
Am 14.10.2023 um 22:54 schrieb DloraH via tlhIngan-Hol:
I'm a little confused. vemmoH for light a fire came out back in 2020. And where does qul chu' come from? paq-batlh has qul wIchenmoH.
Exactly, and {chenmoH} still is the best way to express that. {qul yIchu'} appeared in the promotion of Netflix and was used in DSC only once. As it was not translated by Okrand, it is not considered canon. Regarding the choice of {chu'}, it seemed to be chosen on purpose, because in the show, they didn't "make fire", but they "activated" a fire on a torch. – Nevertheless, this does not mean that it's corret to say it this way. DSC is not (Okrandian) canon. Read more about {qul yIchu'} here: http://klingon.wiki/En/DiscoveryFont Also: http://klingon.wiki/En/IsDiscoveryCanon -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.tlhInganHol.com
On Sat, Oct 14, 2023 at 6:13 PM Lieven L. Litaer via tlhIngan-Hol < tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org> wrote:
In September, there was a discussion on Facebook whether it makes sense to say {qul lIng} "produce a fire". Some suggested this word, while others said that if your produce something, there must be a remaining product, so {lIng} might not be the best choice.
Why not? It's possible to {HoS lIng} in canon, and I don't see how fire is less of a product than energy.
During our preparation for the coming qepHom, Marc Okrand had a chance to forward our question to Maltz, and his answer somehow made both our suggestions be right. He wrote:
You can {lIng} a fire, but you’re more likely to {chenmoH} or {vemmoH} it.
Didn't you already have this conversation back in 2020? -- De'vID
Am 14.10.2023 um 23:37 schrieb De'vID:
Why not? It's possible to {HoS lIng} in canon, and I don't see how fire is less of a product than energy.
Well, some people - including me - argued that when you produce something, there must be some kind of product. Energy is something you can store, but not fire. qurgh said: <<Fire isn't produced, light and heat are produced by fire. Something can start the chemical reaction called fire, but it can't produce a chemical reaction.>> But anyway, Maltz has now confirmed that {lIng} is okay:
You can {lIng} a fire, but you’re more likely to {chenmoH} or {vemmoH} it.
Didn't you already have this conversation back in 2020?
No; The dicussion back than was about how to say call "extinguish" a fire, which is {QongmoH}. The opposite from that was {vemmoH} -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.tlhInganHol.com http://klingon.wiki/En/NewWordsQepHom2020
participants (4)
-
De'vID -
DloraH -
Lieven L. Litaer -
SuStel