tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 01 06:52:28 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {baH} vs {laQ}
- From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: {baH} vs {laQ}
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 95 08:51:32 -0700
jIH: > lengbogh Dochmey bIH baHlu'bogh Dochmey'e'.
charghwI': > nuq?
"Things which are baHed are things which travel." My point is that TKD
gives "torpedo, rocket, missile" as examples of objects for {baH}. All
of these are projectiles. Yes, I do believe that a {baHwI'} is one who
fires a projectile. This limits my translation of {baH} to projectiles
and requires that I find other verbs for other weapons.
Meanwhile, TKD gives {laQ} = fire, energize (e.g., thrusters). It says
"e.g." meaning "for example", and not "i.e." meaning "that is". So one
doesn't HAVE to be talking about engines when one says {laQ}. When I'm
talking about phasers, {laQ} seems to fit perfectly. If I want to fire
a pistol, {laQ} applies; if I want to fire a bullet, {baH} applies. Am
I making an obvious mistake here? All of this seems completely logical
to me.
-- ghunchu'wI'