tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 26 07:03:43 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: wot <tatlh>
> > >qar mu'tlhegh wej, 'ach /chegh/ mu' qaq law' /tatlh'egh/ mu' qaq puS.
>> reH qaq 'ay' wa' neH ghajbogh mu'?
>> (is a word that has only on component always preferable?)
>Not necessarily; but why say more than you need to.
>In this case it is not simply being shorter, it is the definitions of the
>words that make one more preferable.
>Check the thread for Voragh's messages about the canon of the words.
you mean in the archive, don't you? never been there, and i have a
slow internet access, i would like to spend too much time and money
searching on the net (in europe these things cost). i just wanted to
know, whether it's an habbit to prefer compact words instead of
in esperanto you tend to use always combinations of suffixes and
prefixes in order to express another idea, and you avoid to introduce
a new word, as this would make the language more difficult to learn
("why learn more than you need to?). rarely a new word is introduced
and exchanges a combination of fixes.
for example, you always say "rapida" (quick, fast) and "malrapida"
(slow). the new word "lenta" (slow) is used only in poetry.
an example for a new word that exchanged a fix-combination is:
"pigra" (lazy). the fix-combination was: "mallaborema" (mal- = the
opposite of; -labor- = to work; -ema = having the tendency; ->
"having the opposite tendency to work").
now i have a quite large dictionary that is klingon-esperanto. could
anybody tell me if i would get into trouble if i put it on the net?