tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 13 06:06:19 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Problem Words
- From: "Neal Schermerhorn" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Problem Words
- Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 09:08:45 -0500
ghItlh charghwI':
>As I work at updating the New Words List, I have these quandries
>that call for judgement calls. I'd appreciate your opinions so I
>can read them, consider them and then largely ignore them as I
>make my arbitrary decision. {{:)>
Well, you asked...
>Hong boq chuyDaH: loS
>Impulse Fusion Thrusters - 4
>
>We already have {boq} and its definition does not include
>"fusion". So, does this word also mean "fusion", or is it just
>the middle word one uses when one refers to Impulse Fusion
>Thrusters?
My impulse is to provisionally cite this example as a possible translation
for "fusion" - <Hong boq> translates in my head as "alliance of impulse
power" - since I'm not sure what impulse fusion is (anyone got a Tech
manual?) I would be wary to say more.
>pIvchem lIngwI' DaHmey: cha'
>Warp Field Generation Arrays - 2
>
>Note that this is a rare example of a term of this type with
>which he used an explicit plural suffix. Perhaps it is just to
>mark it as definitely a different word than the {DaH} adverbial?
Or the verb. Or perhaps <DaHmey> is a collection of banks. Picture this -
"banks" is a couple of, say, phaser weapon mounts. "Array" is a couple sets
of banks. Using <DaH> without any plural refers to a few banks, while adding
the <-mey> makes it a whole bunch of banks scattered all over - an "array".
>telDaq wovmoHwI'mey
>Wing Lights
>
>The Cat In The Hat returns. Note the locative with no verb,
>unless you think you can nominalize a whole CLAUSE with {wI'}. I
>don't think so. That, or he spaced out and forgot the {lujomlu'}
>which he used earlier for the disruptor cannons.
Perhaps this isn't wrong, as we're looking at a list. He could have said
<telDaq lujomlu' wovmoHwI'mey> and made more grammatical sense, but maybe
for space the rather obvious <lujomlu'> was dropped. (Would it be <mIv
tuQbogh vIghro''e'>?)
In all these cases it is probably wisest to simply avoid the use of these in
any context with permanence, until MO himself clears up any confusion.
Unless he wants us to mull over it for years... and just maybe he does!
We'll see.
Qermaq