On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 18:30, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

'amerI'qa' ‘ev chan ‘ev North America (GN) (qepHom 2016) 'amerI'qa' tIng chan tIng South America (GN) (qepHom 2016)

I don't recall if anyone has pointed this out before, but does anyone else find these backwards? Why isn't it {'ev chan 'ev 'amerI'qa'} and {tIng chan tIng 'amerI'qa'}? I'm probably just forgetting some rule that applies only to the compass directions. I wonder how a Klingon would then render "the American South" (i.e., the southern United States, a geographic and cultural region to the south of the country)? Ditto "the American North". -- De'vID

Thanks everyone for the responses. Now it makes sense to me (again). (I'm sure it made sense to me before because it passed unnoticed, but for some reason it looked odd when I saw these words recently.) On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 18:46, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:

On Mar 1, 2021, at 11:48 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 18:30, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

...

'amerI'qa' ‘ev chan ‘ev North America (GN) (qepHom 2016) 'amerI'qa' tIng chan tIng South America (GN) (qepHom 2016)

I don't recall if anyone has pointed this out before, but does anyone else find these backwards? Why isn't it {'ev chan 'ev 'amerI'qa'} and {tIng chan tIng 'amerI'qa'}? I'm probably just forgetting some rule that applies only to the compass directions.

“America” by itself refers to the connected landmasses of both North and South America. North America is the north region of America, and South America is the south region of America. The alternatives you ask about would mean “America of the North” and “America of the South”.

In English, though, "America" often refers to just the USA, while the connected land masses are "the Americas" plural. I guess that's not how the Klingons learned it. (If there are Americas plural, then "America of the North" would be a perfectly sensible way to render "North America".) In Canada, there's a self-deprecating joke that Canada is actually "North America" (i.e., just a northern part of the USA).

I wonder how a Klingon would then render "the American South" (i.e., the southern United States, a geographic and cultural region to the south of the country)? Ditto "the American North".

The name of the country is {SepjIjQa'}, so {SepjIjQa' tIng chan tIng} works the same way: the south region of the United States.

So how would North and South Dakota or Carolina work? (And if I wanted to say "southern North Dakota" for some reason...?) -- De'vID

Didn't we decide a while back that you couldn't do that, though? Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I remember there being a whole argument about how you couldn't have two nouns with {-Daq} in a row. On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 05:03:19PM -0500, Will Martin wrote:

I don’t think anybody answered this.

The hint is that in English, capitalization hints that the North in North Dakota is a proper name of a place, while southern is not.

I’d include North in the place name -Daq and follow that with south -Daq, similar to the way you’d say, “In the living room on the couch”. Use two -Daqmey like you’d use two prepositions.

charghwI’ ‘utlh (ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)

...

On Mar 2, 2021, at 1:17 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:

So how would North and South Dakota or Carolina work? (And if I wanted to say "southern North Dakota" for some reason...?)

-- De'vID

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

I'm not aware of any such rule. Perhaps the confusion is with the rule that you can't put a Type-5 noun suffix on any non-final noun in a noun compound? There is at least one canonical example of a locative -Daq nested within another: {tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq 'oH toQDuj chenmoHlu'meH Daq wa'DIch'e'.} "1st Construction Site: The Kling District, Klingon Home World" Source: Klingon BoP poster http://klingonska.org/canon/1998-11-01-bop.txt {tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq} probably isn't seen as one 4-noun compound that forms a single locative, but rather two 2-noun compounds forming two locatives, one of which is more specific than the other. (Granted, this poster also violates the rule mentioned above, by describing "wing lights" as {telDaq wovmoHwI'mey}. That might be explained as a shorthand used for labeling purposes, though.) //loghaD ________________________________ From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org> on behalf of mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:02:39 PM To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Klingon Word of the Day: tIng kechpaja:

Didn't we decide a while back that you couldn't do that, though? Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I remember there being a whole argument about how you couldn't have two nouns with {- Daq} in a row.

Wow.. Hold on there. Who the jay' said that and based on what Ca'Non? Who said I can't say {'elaDya'Daq bIQ'a' vengDaq jIHtaH} for "I'm at Greece at a sea city"? ~ Dana'an lIloS bep scribes pharisees je QaqwI'pu'

Another example of “nested” –Daq’s (i.e. “in X [which is] in Y”): loghDaq lupDujHom qoDDaq bIlengtaHvIS, nIbuQbogh novpu' DaSuv Battle menacing aliens in a shuttlecraft journey through space. (STX) Just FYI here are two other examples, not nested but linked with {je} (i.e. “in X and in Y”) poSDaq nIHDaq je QamtaHvIS SuvwI'pu', chaH jojDaq yItnIS lopwI' The initiate must pass through a gauntlet of warriors. (S9) (This refers to someone passing between two lines of warriors who jab him/her with painstiks.) 'ej Hoch vengHomDaq Hoch vengDaq je Suchbogh ghaH qeylIS luQoy woQ le'yo' je 'aghbej ghaH And Kahless spoke to them In every village and city he went, Filled with pride and authority, (PB) -- Voragh ________________________________________________________ From: Felix Malmenbeck I'm not aware of any such rule. Perhaps the confusion is with the rule that you can't put a Type-5 noun suffix on any non-final noun in a noun compound? There is at least one canonical example of a locative -Daq nested within another: {tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq 'oH toQDuj chenmoHlu'meH Daq wa'DIch'e'.} "1st Construction Site: The Kling District, Klingon Home World" Source: Klingon BoP poster http://klingonska.org/canon/1998-11-01-bop.txt<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/klingonska.org/canon/1998-11-01-bop.txt__;!!BpyFHLRN4TMTrA!r406zMkwSAhH7iyQFkmXQYw3AIZTv7eRlk8h-jsWpi8Ha2x58dj5rBHocAnhAna3nG8$> {tlhIngan juHqo'Daq tlhIng yoSDaq} probably isn't seen as one 4-noun compound that forms a single locative, but rather two 2-noun compounds forming two locatives, one of which is more specific than the other. (Granted, this poster also violates the rule mentioned above, by describing "wing lights" as {telDaq wovmoHwI'mey}. That might be explained as a shorthand used for labeling purposes, though.) //loghaD ________________________________ From: mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com<mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> kechpaja:

Didn't we decide a while back that you couldn't do that, though? Perhaps I'm misremembering, but I remember there being a whole argument about how you couldn't have two nouns with {- Daq} in a row.

Wow.. Hold on there. Who the jay' said that and based on what Ca'Non? Who said I can't say {'elaDya'Daq bIQ'a' vengDaq jIHtaH} for "I'm at Greece at a sea city"?

lieven:

The second sentence should be read as {'elaDya'Daq, bIQ'a'Daq jIQal} (= locative) and not {['elaDya'Daq bIQ'a']-Daq jIQal} (= noun noun construction)

Yes, I agree with this (and everything else you wrote). This is what I meant. ~ Dana'an woe unto you scribes and pharisees hypocrites

On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 05:47:54PM +0100, De'vID wrote:

On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 18:30, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

...

'amerI'qa' ‘ev chan ‘ev North America (GN) (qepHom 2016) 'amerI'qa' tIng chan tIng South America (GN) (qepHom 2016)

I don't recall if anyone has pointed this out before, but does anyone else find these backwards? Why isn't it {'ev chan 'ev 'amerI'qa'} and {tIng chan tIng 'amerI'qa'}? I'm probably just forgetting some rule that applies only to the compass directions.

I wonder how a Klingon would then render "the American South" (i.e., the southern United States, a geographic and cultural region to the south of the country)? Ditto "the American North".

Thinking about this for a little while, I realize that you could just as easily describe North and South American as being simply {'ev} and {chan}, since North America is both to the North and West of South America, and South America sticks out to the East. Though I imagine Klingons just copied the English terms and translated them as literally as possible. To answer your question, though, it's probably because the compass points are nouns. So you're really saying "the South (part) of America" and "the North (part) of America". - SapIr

If you consider the curves, the Klingon symbol is a directional compass on a map, right? Sent from my iPhone. charghwI’

On Mar 1, 2021, at 1:09 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:



...

On 3/1/2021 11:47 AM, De'vID wrote:

...

On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 18:30, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote: 'amerI'qa' ‘ev chan ‘ev North America (GN) (qepHom 2016) 'amerI'qa' tIng chan tIng South America (GN) (qepHom 2016)

I don't recall if anyone has pointed this out before, but does anyone else find these backwards? Why isn't it {'ev chan 'ev 'amerI'qa'} and {tIng chan tIng 'amerI'qa'}? I'm probably just forgetting some rule that applies only to the compass directions. In the post introducing the direction words, Okrand describes the words as meaning area in the direction of. He mostly uses it to mean something like "area to the east beyond the named noun," and so forth, but he also uses it to mean "eastern portion of the named noun," and so on. He gives us veng chan yoS, which he translates literally as city's area-eastward district, and he says this mean the eastern part of the city. It doesn't mean a district beyond the eastern edge of the city.

So 'amerI'qa' 'ev chan 'ev can refer to the portion of America that is northward, rather than the area beyond America to the north in the same way that veng chan can refer to the eastern portion of the city. And so on.

-- SuStel http://trimboli.name _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org