tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 04 14:45:41 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Joke word - HoSchem
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Joke word - HoSchem
- Date: Fri, 4 Jul 1997 17:48:05 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Fri, 4 Jul 1997 00:06:49 -0700 (PDT) [email protected]
wrote:
> This is peHruS. Of course, I am extremely interested in "clearly analyzable
> into other elements."
>
> mu' {leSSov} wIpojlaHchu''a'
ghobe'. ma"guess"laH, ach mapojlaHchu'be'.
> mu' {Hu'Sov} vIchupta'DI' bepbe' vay'
ghobe'. ngeD jIbepmeH Qu'. jIbep. qun 'oS'a' *Hu'Sov*?
qawlaHghach 'oS'a' *Hu'Sov*? "Hindsight" 'oS'a' *Hu'Sov*? De'
ngo' 'oS'a' *Hu'Sov*? QIt De' ghojlu'bogh 'oS'a' *Hu'Sov*?
> 'ach chay' mu'vam vI'oghta'
mu'qoqvetlh Da'oghDI' ta' Dachavbe'. mISbogh QIch DachenmoH neH.
> tlhIngan Hol mu'ghomDaq wa' mu' 'oH mu' {leSSov}
Dat wa' mu' 'oH mu' {leSSov}.
> Hoch poH pIm mu' chu' chenmoHmeH mu'mey laghlu'bogh 'ay'mey DIlo' 'e'
> luchaw'be'bej tlhIngan Hol DuSaQ'a' nuvpu'
qar. 'ej lughba' nuvpu'vam.
> mu' 'ay'mey DIlellaHbe' net Sov qar'a'
qar.
> 'ach mu' {leSSov} cha' 'ay'mey vIwav 'ej mu' {leS} mu' {Sov} je vISuq
> mu' {leSSov} mIw vIpab 'ej mu' {Hu'Sov} vI'ogh
Donbe' {leSSov} {Hu'Sov} je. vay' 'oSchugh {Hu'Sov} vaj
yajlu'meH chelnISchu' {Hu'} {Sov} je. 'ach teHbe'ba'. {leSSov}
yIlIj! ngo' mu' 'oH {leSSov}. nIteb QamnIS {Hu'Sov}. {leSSov}
wuvlaHbe' {Hu'Sov}.
> mu' {peHghep} vIwavDI' "age" 'oS mu' {ghep} qay'be'
qay'qu'! mu' 'oHbe' {ghep}. In English, "Lieutenant" and
"sergeant " are both nouns referring to rank, much as the
various words ending in {-ghep} refer to ages. Does that mean
"ant" is an independant word meaning "one who holds rank"? This
is the one huge gaping flaw in this repetitive, futile crusade
you've been on for the past several years which you absolutely
refuse to see.
You cannot logically view effects and deduce cause, then use
that cause to invent new effects. This approach is logically
flawed because anyone who studies logical tables can tell you
that causes can never be descerned. Causes create effects.
Effects do not create causes. Okrand has access to the causes
which create words in our vocabulary. We do not. That is why we
have NEVER ONCE encouraged you to continue this Qu'qoq.
There are so many other useful things you could be doing with
your valuable intellect. This really is a waste of your time and
everyone else's. Please just give it up.
> 'a nuq 'oS mu' {peH} "inclusion" 'oH'a' maq KLI: maSovchu'be'
> vaj wIlo'laHbe'
'ej lughba' KLI.
> mu' {ruStay} vIwavDI' "ritual" 'oS mu' {tay} qay'be'
qar. qay'be'ba'.
> 'a nuq 'oS mu' {ruS} "bonding" 'oH'a' maq KLI: maSovchu'be'
> vaj wIlo'laHbe'
'ej lughba' KLI.
> wa' mu' 'oHmo' mu' {leSSov} mapojtaHvIS wIlaghlaHbe'
bIlugh.
> 'ach mIwvetlh wIlo'laH 'e' vIHar 'ej 'e' vItul
'ej bImujba'.
> nuq jang MO 'e' vIloS
>
> SKI: I posted {Hu'Sov} in the pattern of {leSSov} and ~mark approved it.
> However, it cannot be canon because MO has not used it. So far, KLI has
> proclaimed we cannot extract parts of words. True, or will "clearly
> analyzable parts" be allowed to help tlhIngan Hol grow?
In TKD, Okrand clearly tells us not to do this. In posts since
this, Okrand clearly tells us not to do this. I'm sorry I missed
that Okrand approved {Hu'Sov}. Would you mind quoting his
approval so I can begin to understand what it is supposed to
mean? Right now, I sincerly don't have a clue.
> peHruS
charghwI'