tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 27 09:06:41 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: [tlhIngan-Hol] Re: Hoch placement

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

From: "Steven Boozer" <[email protected]>

> Dar'Qang:
> > > Ok.  To summarize:
> > > Duj Hoch : "the entire vessel"
>
> SuStel:
> >Maybe.
>
> Best to use the quality {naQ} "be full, be whole, be entire" for this.
E.g.:
>
>   cha' choQmey naQ tu'lu' 'ej tep choQ bIngDaq lo' law' bID choQ tu'lu'
>    2 Full Decks and a Half Utility Deck under the Cargo Deck  (KBoP)
>
> N.B.:  {choQ naQ} "full deck, whole deck" vs. {bID choQ} "a half deck,
half
> a deck"

Probably not.  There is a difference between "being whole" (a quality) and
the "whole of" a thing (a quantity).

If I have half a pie, I cannot eat {chab naQ}, but I CAN eat {chab Hoch} (if
{Hoch} does indeed work this way).

The Bird of Prey poster is not problematical to this, because a {choQ naQ}
is not talking about the quantity of a deck, it is talking about a {naQbogh
choQ} "deck which is whole."

{naQ} describes a quality of a thing, not the quantity of a thing that acts
or is acted upon.  {Hoch} probably does that.

A {Duj naQ} is a ship that isn't broken up into parts.  {Duj Hoch} (again,
if this really is how {Hoch} works) is the entirety of a ship, all of a
ship.

That {Hoch} works this way isn't just an arbitrary idea based on a
questionable example.  It also makes sense according to TKD.  {Duj Hoch} is
a noun-noun construction in which {Duj} modifies {Hoch}.  You're talking
about an all, an entirety.  Which entirety?  The entirety of the ship, the
ship's entirety.  This is a standard genitive construction.

SuStel
Stardate 4158.0

Back to archive top level