I never noticed Say’qu’moH… I’d have thought sterilise would be Say’moHchu’. —jevreH Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 8, 2019, at 09:00, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

There are some klingon words, which's given english definitions don't match the direct translation of the klingon word.

Is it imperative, that when using such words, we need to be thinking of the given english definition, or can we use the same klingon word to express what the klingon word actually means ?

To illustrate my obscure point, I will use the verb Say'qu'moH and an ancient cat.

So, lets say we just spent a fortune to acquire an ancient cat, and the first thing we do is to make it very clean..

{vIghro' tIQ wIje'ta'bogh wISay'qu'moH} we make the ancient cat which we have bought very clean

Right ?

But the problem is, that Say'qu'moH has been given as "to sterilize".

So, although the klingon says "we make the cat very clean", the Ca'NoN translation says "we sterilize the cat".

And because I can *feel* someone ready to say that "to sterilize" is to "make something very clean", I will rush to say YOU ARE WRONG !!!

To sterilize means to make something germ-free. Making something very clean, means making it very clean.. To be sterile is to be very clean, to be very clean isn't to be sterile.

So, the question is: Can we use Say'qu'moH to mean what it actually means i.e. "to make something very clean", or since it has been given as "to sterilize", it can only mean "sterilize" ?

~ changan qIj _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

On 3/8/2019 9:00 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:

There are some klingon words, which's given english definitions don't match the direct translation of the klingon word.

Is it imperative, that when using such words, we need to be thinking of the given english definition, or can we use the same klingon word to express what the klingon word actually means ?

To illustrate my obscure point, I will use the verb Say'qu'moH and an ancient cat.

So, lets say we just spent a fortune to acquire an ancient cat, and the first thing we do is to make it very clean..

{vIghro' tIQ wIje'ta'bogh wISay'qu'moH} we make the ancient cat which we have bought very clean

Right ?

But the problem is, that Say'qu'moH has been given as "to sterilize".

So, although the klingon says "we make the cat very clean", the Ca'NoN translation says "we sterilize the cat".

And because I can *feel* someone ready to say that "to sterilize" is to "make something very clean", I will rush to say YOU ARE WRONG !!!

To sterilize means to make something germ-free. Making something very clean, means making it very clean.. To be sterile is to be very clean, to be very clean isn't to be sterile.

So, the question is: Can we use Say'qu'moH to mean what it actually means i.e. "to make something very clean", or since it has been given as "to sterilize", it can only mean "sterilize" ?

When we're given something like this, where a word plus suffixes is translated in a way that an analysis of word plus suffixes would not yield, I take it to mean that the combination has special meaning to Klingons through whatever quirk of language evolution, and the meaning of the components is overridden. If you say *vIghro' wISay'qu'moH,* you're saying you're sterilizing the cat, even if you just wanted to say you're making the cat very clean. You have to find another way to say what you want, like *vIghro' wISay'moHchu'*/we clean the cat perfectly/ or *vIghro' wISay'moH; ratlhbej pagh lam*/we clean the cat; it's certain that no dirt remains/ or *vIghro' wIlamHa'qu'moH*/we make the cat very un-dirty./ It's similar to how, as we learn in KGT, when you add *-chu'* to *Suv* it implies a fight to the death; you cannot say *Suvchu'* to mean /fight without error./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name