tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jan 15 13:38:30 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: RE: -bogh and -wI'

On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 12:10:15 -0800 (PST) "Andeen, Eric" 
<> wrote:
> vIlughnISmoHbe' 
> I do not cause it to need to be correct ??!?!? - this one doesn't make any
> sense to me.

Well, it doubly makes sense to me. As you interpret it, given 
the right context, it might be that it needs to be correct and 
someone is accusing me of creating that need and I want to state 
strongly that the need is independent of me. I am not the origin 
of the need. It needs to be correct, but I don't cause it to 
need to be correct. Some other source (law, perhaps or tradition 
or, of course, honor) causes it to need to be correct.

This could also mean, "I need to not cause it to be correct." In 
other words, maybe it is incorrect and I need to keep it that 
way for auditing purposes or instructional purposes or whatever. 
Or maybe it is incorrect, but I have pressing needs to do other 
things and any suggestion that I take the time to correct it 
would be met with vigorous objection.

So, depending on context, it could be meaningful.
> pagh
> Beginners' Grammarian

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level