tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 28 14:44:36 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: semiotic continua (was "RE: KLBC: winners/losers")

Lawrence writes:
>Consider the following task:
>
>You have a continuum with <<Qap>> and <<luj>> as the end points.  Where along
>this line, and in what order, will you lay out <<Qapbe', QapHa', QapHa'be',
>lujbe', lujHa'>>, and <<lujHa'be'>>?  There's potential for some very subtle
>distinctions in meaning here (most especially because of <<-Ha'>>).
>
>Just thought I'd try and stir something up for the weekend.

I don't see the suffix {-Ha'} as always fitting neatly along a line
between two opposites.  It often skews the meaning off the line for
me.  Since there is a word {luj} which means the opposite of {Qap},
I tend to think more of the "do wrongly" meaning of {-Ha'}.

{QapHa'} implies to me something like "malfunction".  I don't see it
as quite in the spectrum between "succeed" and "fail".  {lujHa'} for
me sounds as if someone failed at failing -- like "The Producers" in
the Mel Brooks film of that name.

So I'd put them in the order {Qap, Qapbe', lujbe', luj} with
{QapHa', QapHa'be', lujHa'be', lujHa'} roughly parallel to it.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level