tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 18 07:11:29 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Another idea about {-vo'}
- From: Marc Ruehlaender <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Another idea about {-vo'}
- Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 09:11:17 CST
jatlh De'vID:
>
> What if the verb takes {-Ha'}? Does that reverse the functions of
> {-vo'} and {-Daq}, and what would {-vo'} and {-Daq} mean with a
> {-Ha'}ed verb? I can think of some other words that might take
> {-vo'},
>
> {DuvHa'} "un-advance", "mis-advance"
> {yongHa'} "un-get in", "mis-get in"
>
> How would you interpret {tera'vo' vIHaw'Ha'}? {tera'Daq vIHaw'Ha'}?
>
I failed to flee from/on Earth.
(maybe the English should read "I failed fleeing...")
"un-flee" would mean "come back to face the danger" in my mind and need
special context. given that I'd read the sentences as
I fled from/on Earth but came back to face the danger.
i.e. in neither case would the meanings of {-vo'} and {Daq} be "reversed"
from the un-{Ha'}-ed verb.
with {DuvHa'} as "un-advance" or "retreat after an advance" and
{yongHa'} as "un-get-in" or "get back out" however, I'm not so sure.
{yotlhvo' DuvHa'} might mean either that I started my initial
advance in the fields and that's where I'm going back to, or
that the fields were the target of my initial advance, and I'm
now retreating away from them... although I'd lean to the latter
interpretation. Basically, the former interpretation applies the
{-Ha'} to the whole sentence, the latter only to the verb.
Marc Ruehlaender
aka HomDoq
[email protected]