tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 30 19:33:31 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: Must
On Wed, 30 Apr 1997, Marian Schwartz wrote:
> Just thought I'd throw in my own thought ... "must" doesn't always correlate
> with "need to" exactly. "Need to" seems to imply that for the person's
> well-being, the person needs to die. "Must," in this context, doesn't mean
> that -- in fact, it seems to imply that for the -speaker-'s well-being, the
> person needs to die.
> So, the best translation of that would be, I think, "yIHegh."
I can't put my finger on the -suffix but I know it has something to do
with beneficiary for benefactor of a certain action. Perhaps something on
the structure of "personal prefix (You) - verb "die" - suffix "need" -
suffixes "beneficiary to ____" If you understand... If we are dealing on
the "must" concept as being for the well being of others than that of the
person in question... it should be translated roughly as "You need to die
for ____"
Any thoughts?
Name : Q'ISto'va (Eliseo Christopher d'Annunzio, Esquire)
Email: [email protected]
URL : http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~qris