tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 15 08:22:00 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC: Equality



pagh:
: << There are also a few verbs which relate to equality: <rap> - "be the
same"
:  and <nIb> - "be identical". With these verbs, the things which are the same
:  are the subject of the verb:
:  		rap wa' cheb'a', Hut chebmey je. >>

peHruS:
: muDuQ vuDlIj.  qay''a' mu'tlheghmey {rapchuq wa' cheb'a' Hut chebmey je},
: {nIbchuq wa' cheb'a' Hut chebmey je} je?  lugh'a' 'e' DaQub?  wot {rap} wot
: {nIb} joq DamaS pagh wot {rapchuq} wot {nIbchuq} DamaS?

First, I'm not sure I see the difference between 

 	rap wa' cheb'a' Hut chebmey je.
	1 cheb'a' and 9 chebs are equal

and your proposed

 	?rapchuq wa' cheb'a' Hut chebmey je.
	1 cheb'a' and 9 chebs are equal to each other

Second, since {rap} means "be equal", not the transitive "be equal to
(something else)", it can't take {-chuq}.  This is the suffix used for
reciprocal objects, NOT reciprocal subjects.  (The other Type 1 suffix
{-'egh} is used when the object is the same as the subject [i.e. a
reflexive verb].)  {-chuq} is used with transitive verbs, those verbs which
take an object, not "stative verbs" or "qualities" like {rap} "be the same"
and {nIb} "be identical".  Okrand described {-chuq} in TKD p.36:

	This suffix is used only with plural subjects. It is translated 
	"each other" or "one another". The prefix set indicating "no object" 
	is also used when this suffix is used: 
		{maqIpchuq} 	we hit each other
		{SuqIpchuq}	you (plural) hit each other
		{qIpchuq} 		they hit each other
		{peqIpchuq}	hit each other!

When he said {-chuq} "is used only with plural subjects", this was probably
to distinguish it from the previously discussed {-'egh}.  Note that his
standard example {qIp} "hit" is a transitive verb, not a quality.  Other
examples of {chuq} in canon:

	ja'chuqmeH rojHom neH jaghla' 
	The enemy commander wishes a truce (in order) to confer. TKD 

	maja'chuqjaj? 
	Can we talk?  PK
	(i.e. "may we talk to each other")

	'uQ wISoppu'DI' maja'chuq. 
	We will talk after dinner. PK
	(i.e. "we will talk to each other ...") 

These are of course the problematic {ja'chuq}, which is explained as:

	The verb is made up of {ja'} "tell", {-chuq} "each other}; thus, 
	"confer" is "tell each other". (TKD 65)

	ghobchuq loDnI'pu' 
	"The Brothers Battle One Another" 
	(title of the Kahless and Morath statuette) KCD 

{ghob} "fight, do battle, make/wage war" is here used transitively.

	Hay'chuq 
	They duel one another.  KGT

	Hay'chuqchu' 
	They duel one another to the death. KGT

{Hay'} is also used transitively here.  Cf. also:

	'avwI' Hay' yaS 
	The officer duels the guard. KGT

though {Hay'} can also be used intransitively:

	Hay' chaH 
	They duel. KGT

As we've seen, these verbs are all action verbs, not qualities.  *{rapchuq}
"they are equal one another" is as meaningless as *{Doqchuq} "they are red
one another".  

Note however that {-chuq} can be used on qualities in combination with
{-moH}.  Okrand on startrek.klingon (11/97):

	Since {-moH} is a Type 4 suffix, if a suffix of Type 1, 2, or 3 is 
	to be used (such as {-chuq} "each other" or {-nIS} "need", it would 
	precede the Type 4 {-moH}; for example, {pujchuqmoH} "they weaken 
	each other" ...

These then are grammatical, if a little forced:

	rapchuqmoH
	they equalize each other, cause each other to become the same

	DoqchuqmoH
	they redden each other, cause each other to become red


-- 
Voragh                       
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons



Back to archive top level