tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jul 03 22:30:38 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: jIchegh tulajchugh

Alan Anderson wrote:

> [jIngaj]
> 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,

It would be unclear in the context of any message in my opinion.  Not now, of
course, but I would be suprised if more people than not could read it easily.

> 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.

It's a topic for debate.  There'll be speakers on both sides.

> If "I will be brief" makes sense to English speakers, {jIngaj} ought to
> make just as much sense to them.

It makes sense to English speakers because it's a very common phrase but it
can't be taken literally in English either.  When I say, "I'll be brief", I
mean, "The amount of time required for me to do or say (something) will be

> peHruS even gave it as his interpretation
> of what I meant, although he then proceeded to claim not to understand it.

Good guess.  I "probably" would have figured it out from context too.

> >...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}.

That would be be even better.  My example wasn't very good at all.

>  But that
> isn't what I meant.  What I meant was exactly "I will be brief."

But you can't physically be brief unless you're speaking in terms of life or

>  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.

So what actually was going to be brief was the required time, not you.

ngaj poH vIlo'nISbogh.

How about this?  Excuse my relative clause if it's wrong.  I'm telling you
{-bogh} is really MESSING me up.

> -- ghunchu'wI'


Back to archive top level