tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Dec 11 20:12:30 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Hech
According to [email protected]:
>
> >From: [email protected] (Silauren Half-Elven)
>
> >*TKD*Daq //mojaQ// Hech *suffix* 'ach *TKD*Daq *suffix* Hech >//mojaq//.
> >lughtaH //mojaQ// //mojaq// ghap. lughtaH nuq?
>
> Now, be careful. {Hech} is not being used properly here. When you use {Hech},
> you aren't saying "mean" as in "one word means another," or, "What does this
> phrase mean?" {Hech}, if you look it up in TKD, means "intend" or "mean to".
> It describes intent. It does *not* describe symbolic meaning, as in words.
> Too many people have been abusing {Hech} in this way, including our
> hard-working BG, charghwI', who's usually never so off-base.
Well, perhaps I have made this error in the past, but I don't
think I've made it any time recently. I think I know better. In
this particular case, it wasn't me who said it.
I'll own my errors, but I want to make sure people don't get
the impression that in this instance this error was mine.
Anyway, your point about {Hech} is totally right.
> Here are some examples:
>
> {"QIH" 'oS "destruction"} = "QIH" means "destruction"
Very nice.
> {nuq wIyajmeH mu'tlheghvam nuja'} = What does she mean by that phrase?
Very weird, though I'm not sure I'm ready to argue about it. I
think I'd tend to just follow her statement with {nuqjatlh?}
> {qaS lot'a' 'e' Dellaw' maQmIghvetlh} = This omen seems to mean a great
> disaster will occur.
Again, very nice.
> Here are some correct usages of {Hech}:
>
> {may' Hech Da'} = The corporal intends the battle.
Again, weird, but I'm not sure I want to argue about it. I had
never successfully come up with a way to use {Hech} except in a
sentence-as-object construction, like in your next example.
> {tachDaq ghaH vIghom 'e' vIHech} = I intend to meet him at the bar.
Classic. Architypical.
> Anyways, since this post was about the word {mojaq}, I'll voice my own
> opinion on how that goes and see just what comes of it with the rest of you.
> On the K-E side, it is {mojaq}. On the E-K side, it is {mojaQ}. So how are we
> to know which it is? Well, the word for "prefix" is {moHaq} on both sides and
> I'd just like the symmetry that would exist between these two words if it
> were {mojaq}. {mojaq} & {moHaq}. Nice symmetry. I know that's a huge
> assumption and I could be way out in left field, like I am usually anyways,
> so I'm just waiting for God's final word on how this should be.
>
> -=-G-=-
That's an acceptable opinion. Again, I think either {mojaq} or
{mojaQ} will do, since neither is ambiguous. Consider it
dialectical. In the south, we say {mojaQ}...
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |