tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 17 14:03:07 2011

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: [Tlhingan-hol] (no subject)

Robyn Stewart ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']



Daj. jIjatlhchugh <ngaSwI'vamDaq Doq 'op paSlogh 'ej SuD 'op paSlogh> bIjatlh'a' <chay' nguv latlh paSlogh?>?

That is, if I said "some socks in this container are red and some are blue," you would feel that as the red and blue contingents each represented less than half, that there must be more socks of a colour I haven't yet specified, required to make up the entirety of my sock collection?

I might respond that way if the sentence were <ngaSwI'vamDaq Doq paSlogh puS 'ej SuD paSlogh puS>, but I might also just assume that there were only a few socks total in there.

At 13:47 17/10/2011, you wrote:
I still see it as part of a simple progression:

none - some - half -  most   - all
pagh - 'op  - bID  - HochHom - Hoch


YMMV.

--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ghunchu'wI' 'utlh [mailto:[email protected]]
>
> ja' Voragh:
>> It might just be my dialect, but {'op} "some" implies "few" or
>> at least "not many"... I think of {'op} as being the opposite
>> of {HochHom} "most, greater part",...
>
> I too disagree with that understanding. I think {'op} just means an
> unspecified number. It implies a number greater than zero, and I
> wouldn't use it when the number is likely to be all of the population
> being considered, but I don't know that doing so would be wrong.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol


_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol



Back to archive top level