tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 29 21:05:27 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC
- Date: Wed, 29 May 1996 23:07:23 -0500
~mark writes:
>>{wov} sounds to me like it describes reflectivity, while {wew} is emmissive.
>>How about {wewwI'} or {wewqu'wI'}?
>
>Interesting. I remember once having the same discussion about boch
>vs. wov, and deciding that "wov" was emmissive while "boch" was reflective
>(we seem to have forgotten about wew at that time). So where DOES that
>leave "wov"?
My theory:
{wew} describes something which emits light.
{wov} describes something which reflects as opposed to absorbing light.
{boch} describes specular (mirror-like) as opposed to "flat" reflection.
>I THINK we have a certain amount of support for "wov" as
>emmissive... wasn't it used in the Hallmark commercial, talking about the
>lights on the ornament?
Doesn't *anybody* have a transcript of that commercial?!
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj