tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 03 21:08:25 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: jIchegh tulajchugh


ja' K'ryntes:
>Actually, this would've stumped me too.  It's not you that will be short
>it's your
>sentences, comments, or explanations (whatever you were talking about).

I accept that some people don't understand my usage.  I don't see a reason
for "I occupy a short period of time" to be unclear in the context of my
message, but I will believe people who tell me they didn't get it.  That
doesn't mean I'm going to stop using it that way, as I still think it's an
appropriate thing to say.

If "I will be brief" makes sense to English speakers, {jIngaj} ought to
make just as much sense to them.  peHruS even gave it as his interpretation
of what I meant, although he then proceeded to claim not to understand it.

>...If I were intending to say that my sentences would be short then I
>would say {ngaj mu'tlheghmeywIj}.

For that meaning, I would have said {tIqbe' mu'tlheghmeywIj}.  But that
isn't what I meant.  What I meant was exactly "I will be brief."  I did
not want to say anything about the length of my sentences.  I wanted to
say something about the length of time *I* was taking for my message.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level