tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 07 20:20:27 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Noun-Noun Construction

On Mar 8,  1:42am, [email protected] wrote:
> Subject: Re: Noun-Noun Construction
> >     Certainly, verbs like {QuchHa'}, {lo'laH}, {lo'laHbe'}, {jubbe'}, and
> > I FOUND IT {HeghmoH} should all be acceptable in use as >adjectives, so
> > long as there is no Type 5 noun suffix involved. Do I hear the whistle of
> >incoming missiles? {{:)>
> >
> >charghwI'
> NO no no no no no no no no!!! If you use {HeghmoH} as an adjective, it's
> ambiguous. {tar HeghmoH} does NOT mean "fatal poison," it means "He/She
> causes the poison to die" which is a fatal thing to say to a Klingon.
> Unless of course you wished to complement him/her on his/her great
> tolerance to some ingested toxin.
> {tar tlhutlh rIntaH ghaH 'ej ghaH HeghmoHbe' 'oH
> 'oH HeghmoHqu' ghaH}
> Guido#1, Leader of All Guidos

     I can see that this is ambiguous if you were simply presented with a
sentence fragment. In context, it would not be so ambiguous:

               tar HeghmoH tlhutlhpu' ghaH

     Meanwhile, your interpretation of HeghmoH ignores the entry in the word
list in TKD. In particular, I find it interesting that {-moH} is commonly
used to change an intransitive verb into a transitive one, but in this case,
the definition in TKD has {Hegh} as intransitive and {HeghmoH} ALSO
intransitive. You are interpreting {HeghmoH} to be a synonym for {HoH}, and
while you got there through a logical use of the suffix meanings, you don't
have much of a case, since {HeghmoH} does not mean "kill". It means "be
fatal", and in the English-Klingon side, it says "fatal, be fatal", which
fits the pattern of "adjective, verb" definitions described on the clear but
surprisingly controversial passage in the word list introduction on pages

     I think there is a pretty strong case for using it adjectivally, so long
as it is used without the Type 5 noun suffix.


Back to archive top level