tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 16 12:54:36 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Interesting constuct...
- From: Jarno Peschier <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Interesting constuct...
- Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 21:55:09 -0100
At 06:55 16-04-96 -0700, you wrote:
>> I hope Hochlogh and paghlogh become accepted. Every single time and nary a
>> time. I like it.
>
>{-logh} is a suffix specifically intended for use with number
>words. {pagh} is a number word, and while the meaning may be
>rather odd, {paghlogh} does look grammatically correct.
>{*Hochlogh} is not a word with our current understanding of the
>language, since {Hoch} is a noun and not a number word.
With paghlogh probably meaning something like "zero times" (according to
context something like "never", "not", or "don't", as in {paghlogh vIlegh} =
"I've never seen him" or {paghlogh yIqIp} = "Don't hit hem!", even though
{net} or {Qo'} would probably be much more natural in these cases) we are
then still left with the meaning for the following words:
paghDIch = zeroth? ;-)
paghleS = synonym for today?
paghHu' = synonym for today as well?
paghben = synonym for today? for this year?
Or would these be considered nonsense, even though actually grammatical? I
wonder...?
Qapla'
peSHIr
Jarno Peschier, [email protected], 2:2802/245.1@Fido
162:100/100.1@Agora, 74:3108/102.1@QuaZie, 27:2331/214.1@SigNet
___________________________________________________________________________
What was was, before was was was? Before was was was, was was is.