# Re: Hoch

```ja' peHruS:
>ghobe'

My, you *are* still stuck on square one, aren't you?  I thought my pie
examples were sure to do the trick.  I'll give it one more try.

>Now you are wrong regarding {Hoch}, too. {Hoch} refers to "all" the elements
>of a set. {HochHom} refers to "some" of the elements of a set.

{Hoch} indeed means "all" or "each" of a set's members, when it's used
before a noun in a counting sense.  The examples on TKW pages 33, 51,
74, and 136 show us the "all" meaning, and Okrand expanded on it with

{HochHom} specifically means "most, greater part".  For "some" we have
the word {'op}.  And again, for "some" of a set's members, we find the
word used before the noun, on Skybox card S7.

But the {nIn Hoch} and Skybox S15 {HochHom} examples place the words
*after* a noun.  Significantly, in both cases the noun in question is
a *single* thing, not a set of things.  This is definitely not a
"count" usage.  It can meaningfully be interpreted only as something
like a "fraction" usage.

>{naQ} refers to "all" of any one element (entity).

How can you keep thinking that after taking a careful look at its
definition?  Let me repeat what TKD has to say about it:

| naQ - be full, whole, entire (v) [TKD Addendum E-K]
| naQ - be full, whole, entire, complete (v) [TKD Addendum K-E]

Let me also repeat my observation from last time:

| {naQ} does not mean "be all of" or "be the entirety of".

By the way, look closely -- I used the word "entirety", not "entity".

{naQ} is a verb.  "All" of something is a noun.  That in itself should
be a sufficient explanation of why {chab naQ} can't be taken to mean
"all of the pie".  Piled on top of the other explanations, arguments,
and examples which I have tried to give clearly to the best of my
ability, it should be capable of demolishing any remaining shred of
belief that {naQ} refers to "all of" something.

{Hoch}, on the other hand, *is* a noun, and it *is* the word used in
the {nIn Hoch} "all of the fuel" example.

If you're still not with me, I'd appreciate some examples to show why
you don't agree.

-- ghunchu'wI'

```