tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 14 23:32:51 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Macro and micro
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Macro and micro
- Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 00:36:59 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Wednesday, January 14, 1998 3:04 PM
Subject: Re: Macro and micro
>Feh! Just what is it about those seductive suffixes -Hom and -'a' that
make
>people want to abandon mach and tIn?
{tIn} and {mach} are about size, and nothing more. If a thing is not
considered large in size (compared to whatever), then it is not {tIn}.
{-'a'} and {-Hom} represent degree, but not always size. A {rojHom} "truce"
is a "minor peace" not because the treaty is less lengthy, or because it
lasts a shorter time than a {roj} "peace." It's less significant, less
important, and of a lesser degree than {roj}.
Sometimes {-'a'} and {-Hom} DO include the notion of size, but this is only
on a case-by-case basis.
SuStel
Stardate 98040.3