tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 02 07:46:07 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: "be proud of"



>Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 18:13:32 -0400
>Originator: [email protected]
>From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

>I had suggested {tlhIngan [cleavage]lIjvaD bIHem}.

>charghwI' countered:
>> Hmmm. Can we really consider the pride to be beneficial to the
>> cleavage? Is the pride intended for the cleavage? I think
>> {-mo'} is a much better suffix here.

>r'Hul has already said she didn't want to say she was proud BECAUSE OF them.
>I was trying to come up with a translation that she would agree with AND is
>grammatical.  I agree, being proud for the benefit of a BODY PART is not as
>reasonable as I first thought.

>But what DOES "be proud of" really mean in English, anyway?  How else could
>you say it and mean the exact same thing?  To "be proud because of it" says
>that "it" is the cause of your pride, and doesn't indicate anything special
>about what "it" is doing.  When I say "I am proud because of you" to my son
>I am being selfish and denying him the benefit of my pride.  If I say "I am
>proud of you" I am giving him praise.  I think the {'oHvaD Hem} phrase does
>justice to the intended meaning of "be proud of it."

I have to disagree with ghunchi'wI' and agree with charghwI'.  The cleavage
is neither the beneficiary nor recipient of pride; pride isn't given to
things, nor do they benefit from it.  The cleavage is the *cause* of the
pride.  I am proud of my cleavage means I am proud *due to* my cleavage.
If I'm proud of my son (if I had one), in a sense that means he has *caused
me* to experience pride, doesn't it?  If it weren't for him, I wouldn't be
proud.  That's what "being proud of" someone means.  That's *just* what
"-mo'" was made for.

>-- ghunchu'wI'


~mark


Back to archive top level