Re: adverb suffixes???

["William H. Martin" <whm2m@virginia.edu>]

On 5 Dec 1999 04:22:07 -0000 "Mark E. Shoulson" <mark@kli.org> 
wrote:

> >From: "William H. Martin" <whm2m@virginia.edu>
> >Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 10:32:40 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
> >
> >Thinking more on this, I can see some possibilities for 
> >expansion of the list of adverbials that can take {-Ha'} BECAUSE 
> >they already have opposites:
> >
> >tughHa' - far into the future.
> >qenHa' - far into the past.
> 
> Woops, didn't see this when I posted my last letter.
> 
> We didn't know there was a {qen} before we had it, so {tughHa'} then could
> have meant either {qen} OR "far in the future"... or for the matter be
> synonymous with {DaH}, negating the "at another time" aspect of
> {tugh}... or more likely, mean nothing meaningful at all.  As it still
> might.
> 
> >I could also see a strange use of {pa'Ha'}, as in:
> >
> >1: Qanqor wISamlaHbe'. Dat wInejpu'!
> >	[We can't find Krankor. We've looked for him everywhere!]
> >
> >2: tachDaq bonej'a'?
> >	[Did you look for him in the bar?]
> >
> >1: toH! pa'Ha' wInejpu'!
> >	[Argh! We've looked for him everywhere else!]
> 
> That'd be... strange.
> 
> Now, I'm not saying this is right: it probably isn't, and you probably
> think it isn't too.  Doesn't mean it's a bad thing to say.  People often
> use dodgy nonce grammar and words in colloquial conversation, and it gets
> the point across.  You wouldn't write it in a book, and you wouldn't say it
> to your sixth-grade grammar teacher, but you would say it to a friend, who
> would likely grin at your creative play on words.  Like the time at a
> qep'a', when I asked "why?" about something and you turned to me and said
> "mo'!"  (i.e. "just because!")

More accurately, I sang {-mo', -mo' neH}. Of course, singing a 
syllable as short as {-mo'} doesn't sound much like singing... I 
hoped my broadway hand gestures would have made my intent more 
obvious.

"Because, just because..."

We do have inspired moments at qep'a'.
 
> ~mark

charghwI'