tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 22 10:38:04 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: qama'

On Sun, 21 Feb 1999 23:38:59 -0800 (PST) 

> In a message dated 2/19/1999 1:43:28 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> writes:
> << 
>  {'ar} is not combined with {-logh}. {'ar} is simply one question 
>  word. {'arlogh} is another...>>
> Perhaps I am mistaken.  I really did think MO gave us a combination of {'ar}
> and the number suffix {-logh}. 

Yep. Mistaken. He never presented it as a question word plus a 
number suffix. He just presented it as a new word. You presumed 
the rest.

Remember that Okrand characteristically breaks down most 
sentences he utters right after he says them, explaining the 
root words and affixes. He didn't do that with {'arlogh}. There 
is a reason he didn't do that with {'arlogh}. In particular, he 
didn't do that with {'arlogh} because he didn't want to give 
license to people trying to do exactly what you are trying to 
do, which is make up new words based upon your own presumptions 
about the language.

> That was just too obvious.  I did not even
> consider the possibility that this is a whole new word with no relationship to
> those two syllables.  I guess that {nuqDaq} really is not a combination of
> {nuq} and {-Daq}, to follow your logic.

> So, if {'arDIch} comes to pass, it won't be because {'ar} is taking the number
> suffix 
> {-DIch}, either.  It will be a whole new word without association to those
> obvious parts when you enter it into your dictionary.

You are exactly right. And since that has not happened yet, and 
probably never will happen, please recognize that *'arDIch* is 
not a word. It is a pair of syllables that you alone would like 
to treat as a word. The rest of us will likely continue to 
ignore it.

If Okrand comes along some day and uses it or some other word 
with its meaning, we'll go for it. Meanwhile, we went a long 
time without "wall", and somehow, I think that is a more 
fundamentally necessary meaning than the one you would choose 
for your *'arDIch*.

> peHruS

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level