tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 31 20:11:56 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: tera'ngan pab
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC: tera'ngan pab
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 1996 00:13:03 -0500
David Barron writes:
>Your argument for disecting {ja'chuq} is sound but it assumes that
>that because it can disected it must fit that mold.
I don't base my opinion merely on the dissectability of the word.
The gloss "discuss, confer" implies to me that it is intended to
mean simply taking part in the activity of discussing. The fact
that it also appears to mean "tell one another" is an additional
point in favor of this interpretation, but not the *only* point.
However, we already have canon usages of things like {De' HInob}.
{De' manobchuq} isn't much of a step from there, and {De' maja'chuq}
is barely another step further. So my argument goes a bit flat.
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj