tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 11 06:27:17 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: A poem
- From: Mark J. Reed <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: A poem
- Date: Fri, 11 Nov 94 09:23:52 EST
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 11 Nov 1994 09:06:58 -0500. <[email protected]>
ghItlh charghwI':
\ While I am not claiming that my authority discounts yours, I
\ just want to reiterate that it is not merely that I didn't
\ think of this possibility. I still think it is wrong. I think
\ that the action of the verb has had a change of state {-choH}
\ and that it is complete {-pu'}. If it is the case that this can
\ imply that the change of state is in completion, but the action
\ is not, then somebody has to correct my basic understanding of
\ how these suffixes work. I don't think this interpretation is
\ valid.
And you may be right.. I'd be interesting in hearing some other opinions
on the subject . . .
\ > Of course, some form with "tagh" might be a better way to convey the idea:
\ >
\ > qaS 'e' tagh may' "the battle begins to happen"
\
\ Fine. I like this better. It might be simpler and more accurate
\ to the English to say, {taghpu' may'}.
Not to bring up the old discussion about transitivity or lack thereof in
Hol, but from the description of "tagh" in the mu'ghom, I gather that it
takes an object ("to begin, initiate (a process)"), and I'm uncomfortable with
leaving it objectless. How about "may' taghlu'pu'"? Almost "The battle
was joined" . . .
-marqoS
--
Mark J. Reed
Email: [email protected] - Voice: +1 404 315 6296 x158 - Fax: +1 404 315 0293
SecureWare, Inc. / 2957 Clairmont Rd Suite 200 / Atlanta GA 30329-1647