tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 19 06:38:17 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [KLBC] RHOTS
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: [KLBC] RHOTS
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 09:37:44 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 97-09-19 01:20:42 EDT, SuStel wrote:
>
> Also, {lo'laH} is a verb, and needs a prefix. {jIlo'laHqu'} "I'm really
> valuable!" / "I'm worth millions!"
>
> --
> SuStel
> qoH vuvbe' SuStel
> Stardate 97716.0
>
The definition for this verb (lo'laH - be valuable) seems to be a bit
misleading, and has confused me in the past. In section 4.2.10, page 46 of
TKD, {lo'laH} is actually used:
vIlo'laHbe' - they are useless to me, [literally] "I cannot use them"
So the object of {lo'laH} is the thing that is valuable/useable, and the
subject is who can use it. This makes sense; the gloss given in the word
list is merely inaccurate. So {jIlo'laHqu'} means that things in general are
valuable for me, or I can use something (which is unknown). The {-qu'} at
the end of {-laH} might indicate that things are valuable (CAN be used), but
you don't necessarily take advantage of their value.
To say "I'm really valuable" using {lo'laH}, I'd probably say {mulo'laH
vay'}, or if you really want, {vIlo'luH} or {vIlo'la'}. However, "Someone
can use me" seems odd to me, so something along the lines of {jIpotlhchu'qu'}
might be better.
Speaking of {-lu'} and {-laH}, note also that both syllables of {Qapla'}
can now be analyzed: "Success is possible," or "One is able to win."
-Tad Stauffer
{pagh wagh Sagh Qagh wagh Dogh}
"Nothing costs more than an error."