tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 15 17:43:24 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: SIS
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: SIS
- Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:07:45 -0400
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
>In a message dated 98-06-15 09:22:46 EDT, charghwI' wrote:
>
> >> In a message dated 98-06-13 11:14:46 EDT, ter'eS wrote:
> >>
> >> >qaStaHvIS Hoch nungbogh Hogh SIS 'ej SISqa'.
> >>
> >"It rains while the week which preceeds everything happens and
> >it rains repeatedly," or less likely, "It rains while everything
> >which is preceeded by the week happens and it rains again."
>
> >I see tereS using {nung} as a transitive verb with {Hogh} as
> >subject and {Hoch} as object. {Hoch nungbogh Hogh} then becomes
> >a relative clause. It does sound like tereS likely didn't intend
> >this message to mean what it appears to mean, but I would not
> >relate the error to anything I'd call a compound noun.
>
>Oops, you're right. I didn't even see this possible interpretation until
you
>mentioned it. What I meant to say was "during all of last week".
{nungbogh}
>was supposed to just mean "last". Maybe I could use your coined word
>{vebHa'} instead. The other problem, though, is that I now have doubts
that
>{Hoch} is the appropriate word with {Hogh}. {Hoch Hogh} I now think should
>be understood as "every week". "All week" I now think should be {Hogh
naQ}.
>(Of course, now I have the problem of how to apply both {vebHa'} and {naQ}
>to one noun!)
My own analysis, presented some time ago, suggests that the correct way to
say "all of last week" is {Hogh vebHa' Hoch}. Just as {nIn Hoch} means "all
of the fuel" and not "every fuel," {Hogh Hoch} means "all of the week," and
not "each week."
The same goes with "all of the Twenty-third Century."
SuStel
Stardate 98455.8