tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 16 16:46:00 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Ha' on adverbs



|ghItlh SI'IluD:
|>I have noticed recently that some people have been puting <Ha'> on adverbs.
|>Is this legal? I cannot find any thing in TKD about this. The most recent
|>was <pIjHa'>. I am guessing that this is an attempt at "not very often"
|>or "occassionally".
|
|Okrand has given us *batlhHa'* meaning "dishonorably."  It's not a rule
|exactly, but it is a cannon example of *Ha'* used on an adverbial.
|
|SuSvaj

Another is Do'Ha'.  Cf. Okrand's article, "More from Maltz" [HolQeD 4.4
(Dec. 1996): 11]. Part two is on "Negative Adverbials," which I'll quote in
full since it's quite brief:

       The word for "dishonorably" is batlhHa'. This is clearly the
    adverbial batlh "in an honored fashion" plus a suffix -Ha', which might 
    be analyzed as the negative suffix that follows verbs or else as a
    suffix identical in form (and meaning?) to it, but which appears with
    adverbials.
       Whether this -Ha' can be added to all adverbials is not clear. The
    notes taken while working with Maltz indicate that he balked at vajHa'
    ("not thus?") but accepted Do'Ha' "unfortunately." Information on other
    adverbials has not yet been uncovered, though it is probably in the 
    notes somewhere.


-- Voragh



Back to archive top level