tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 04 20:50:53 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: New word from Okrand



>Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:33:52 -0700 (PDT)
>From: [email protected]
>
>In a message dated 97-07-20 23:06:54 EDT, charghwI' writes:
>
><< 
> A man's fist goes through a closed door, an arrow goes through a 
> bird's heart or a woman goes through a forest.
>  >>
>
>I thought "a woman goes through a forest" is okay as long as she does not go
>through any solid matter within that forest.  She may even touch the trees,
>go through an open hole in a tree, but may not force her way through the pulp
>matter of the tree.
>
>What did I miss in the explanation?  Other than that we are all to buy MO's
>new book as an answer to the word for "window."  Perhaps he will even reveal
>soon the other word for "pass through" matter.

Well, Okrand DID say that passing through a forest was not an instance of
{vegh}.  TO me, this business of focussing on touching matter or not
touching matter is splitting hairs (if I pass through a door but brush
against a cobweb on the way, it stops being vegh?)  A forest is simply not
passed through like a doorway is.  A forest is an obstacle, a doorway is an
opening.  It's an aperture, and that's what vegh is all about: successfully
passing through something.

Why is it that all these posts sound to me like people saying "Oooh!  I got
a new hammer!  Where can I find more nails?  What's this?  A machine bolt?
Maybe it can be a nail too.  And this snap fastener?  I can use my new
hammer on it also!  Great!"  COme on, we got a new word, that doesn't mean
it's the greatest thing since sliced bread.  Get over it and use it for
itself, not for a million other things.

~mark


Back to archive top level