tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 18 22:40:26 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: taghqa' DuSaQ
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: taghqa' DuSaQ
- Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 01:26:57 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Sunday, January 18, 1998 5:18 PM
Subject: Re: KLBC: taghqa' DuSaQ
>I've noticed {tob} is more like "prove", and {Daj} is of course a backfit.
>A good equivalent for our word "test" is actually {'ol}.
But what a wonderful backfit it is! We have no word like it in English that
I can think of.
Both {tob} and {Daj} mean "test." However, with {tob} you get results, and
with {Daj} you don't. If you have a theory and you want to prove that it's
true, the following sentences might be used:
ngerwIj vItob
I test my theory and find out if it's true or not. (This doesn't say
anything about whether your theory was right or not, just that you
discovered the truth without a doubt.)
ngerwIj vIDaj
I test my theory but I am unable to determine the correctness of it. (You
still don't know if it's true or not.)
ngerwIj vI'ol
I verify my theory. I determine that my theory is, in fact, correct.
(Presumably, I'm a good enough scientist to have done so conclusively,
though that fact is not actually specified in the verb. You shouldn't be
able to verify something you haven't conclusively tested.)
Now, because {tob} also means "prove," it's possible that you cannot {tob}
something and have it turn out to be wrong. I rather like my own
interpretation, 'ach ngerwIj vIDaj.
SuStel
Stardate 98051.4