tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 05 21:50:56 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: usage of Hoch and latlh
- From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: usage of Hoch and latlh
- Date: Fri, 5 Jul 96 23:51:39 CDT
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri, 5 Jul 1996 20:17:34 -0700
>In a message dated 96-07-05 02:43:52 EDT, peHruS wrote:
>> For "everyone's ancestors," I prefer Hoch nuv/ghot no'. I agree completely
>> that I would like to have the confusion cleaned up. So far, it appears
>> that Hoch acts like a number and preceeds the noun.
SuStel replied:
>Don't forget that {Hoch} is really a noun, and may still be used as such.
>Although {Hoch no'} could mean either "everyone's ancestors" or "all of the
>ancestors," I think this is just a case where context would make the meaning
>clear. Actually, I'm not sure there is a very significant difference anyway.
jIQochbe'. I don't think there's any chance of confusion:
Hoch no'wI' All of my ancestors
Hoch no'lI' All of your ancestors
Hoch no'Da' All of his/her ancestors
Hoch no'ma' All of our ancestors
Hoch no'ra' All of your (pl.) ancestors
Hoch no'cha' All of their ancestors
You're not likely to misunderstand these as "Everyone's my ancestors," etc.
I've unfortunately deleted the original post. What was the sentence to be
translated? Maybe it can be recast using one of the above.
Voragh
____________________________________________________________________________
Steven L. Boozer | Who adheres slavishly to the order of words
University of Chicago Library | or sentences in the original will meet with
------------------------------| much difficulty; his rendering will be
[email protected] | faulty and untrustworthy. (Maimonides)