tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 22 06:39:27 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
lo'laHghach (was: Quj bej Holtej qorDu')
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: lo'laHghach (was: Quj bej Holtej qorDu')
- Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 08:39:20 CDT
ja' SuStel:
> For another, {lo'laHghach} must obviously be {lo'} + {-laH} + {-ghach}, not
> {lo'laH} + {-ghach}.
>
but {lo'} + {laH} + {-ghach} literally means "ability to use";
how does that mean "value" (TKD p.176)?
{lo'laH} + {-ghach} means "valuableness" or something like that;
I can see how THAT could mean "value".
Or do you suggest that {lo'}+{-laH}+{-ghach} has lost the literal
meaning and is now a 3-syllabic noun meaning "value"??
I'd rather say that {lo'laH}+{-ghach} has been in use long enough
to not be considered marked anymore.
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]