tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 28 01:08:56 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: miscellaneous stuff
- From: Will Martin <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: miscellaneous stuff
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 94 14:06:16 EST
On Jan 28, 1:31pm, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
> Subject: miscellaneous stuff
[on using -Hom to carry the meaning of "short time period"]:
> ...You're right that we have "-Hom", and that'll work for lots of
> situations, but somehow I don't think that a diminuative ending is really
> enough to replace a verb/adjective. We have "nI'" and which aren't
> overshadowed by "-'a'", and most other languages with
> diminuatives/augmentitives still find time for separate words. Still, for
> some things "-Hom" works, but I don't think for everything. On the other
> hand, we do have "mach", which may simply be broader in meaning and handle
> "short" as well.
>
> ~mark
I think I remember you offering an example of Okrand using {-be'} on a
verb being used adjectivally in canon (one of the audio tapes). Adding that
to the {-qu'} that TKD says we can use, we then have the following adjectival
forms for duration:
nI'qu' very long
nI' long
nI'qu'be' not very long (medium)
nI'be' not long (short)
nI'be'qu' very not long (very short)
Shouldn't that be ENOUGH?
charghwI'