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
suffix-prefix-combinations.
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?
sts.