Re: mu'mey chu' vItIv

["David Trimboli" <SuStel@hotmail.com>]

From: <willm@cstone.net>
peHruS
> > tetlh is a list, chem refers to grid cells.
>
> While you speak with certainty, the fact remains that we have no
definition for
> {chem}. It has appeared as part of three compound nouns and it appeared as
a
> separate word (or a typo intended to be a compound noun) in a word pair
for
> which there was a definition. Meanwhile, Okrand never gave us a definition
for
> the word by itself. If it never appears in Klingon except in this one word
> pair, {peQ chem}, or in one of these compounds, {Surchem, pIvchem,
HoSchem},
> then it is not okay to use it as if it were a separate word not requiring
the
> other word in the pair, or the other compound elements in the compound
nouns.

Thanks to /peQ chem/ using /chem/ as a separate word, if someone uses /chem/
in a way not already established by Okrand, I'm not going to bat an eyelash.
Do you REALLY doubt that it means "field"?

The only possible reason why I might hesitate to use it is that it might
turn out that /chem/ is a verb meaning "exist as a field (of something)," or
something like that.  I also don't believe this.

Do we put it on the New Words List?  No, there are still questions.  Should
we be afraid to use it separately, in limited contexts?  No, I don't think
so.

And just how often do you talk about fields of force, etc., on the list,
anyway?

> And I'm really mystified as to how you got it to mean "grid cells".

As am I.

SuStel
Stardate 2161.8