tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 17 20:24:37 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: nobmey
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: nobmey
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 20:21:56 -0700
At 19:14 98-04-17 -0700, you wrote:
}From: Qov <[email protected]>
}
}>At 11:59 98-04-15 -0700, you wrote:
}>}jIHvaD nobmey vInob'eghpu'. (I gave myself some gifts.)
}>}
}>}poS ghopDaq, *Replica Viking* Qeb vIghaj. baS chIS 'oH.
}>}QebDaq *rune*mey ghItlhpu'.
}>
}>Good use of ghItlh, except you probably need {ghItlhlu'pu'} "have been
}>engraved." Otherwise you're implying a third person subject you never
}stated.
}
}I take exception to the first line. Use of {-'egh} requires a "no object"
}prefix on the verb. We've seen no evidence that {-'egh} can refer to the
}indirect object of a sentence, so you'd have to write:
}
}jIHvaD nobmey vInobpu'.
}I have given myself gifts.
lughchu'. I missed that one.
}>}HoS quvmoH wa'DIch.
}>}naQ 'e' quvmoH cha'DIch.
}>}quv'egh 'e' quvmoH chorghDIch.
}>
}>}(On my left hand, I have a replica of a Viking ring.
}>}It's silver. Runes are inscribed into the ring. The
}>}first honors "strength." The second, "wholeness."
}>}The eighth honors the Self.)
}>
}>You know, I think this is a good place for {-ghach}. I read "the second
}>honours its being whole" and "the third honours it honouring itself." This
}>really is an instance of turning a verb into a noun concept, and one where
}>you don't mind calling attention to the word, so {-ghach} seems like the
}>right tool.
}>
}>{naQtaHghach} and {quv'eghghach} "wholeness" and "self honouring." Also
}>consider {'oS} instead of {quvmoH}.
}
}It's more than just "wholeness," it's "ongoing wholeness."
}
}Also, using ordinal suffixes require that the number follow a noun. In this
}case, you'd have to talk about runes. {*rune* wa'DIch}, {*rune* cha'DIch},
}etc. We have no reason to believe that you can drop the noun.
Other than that cha'DIch is used as a noun.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian