tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 28 13:56:42 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: adverbials with -Ha'

lab Voragh:

>Okrand has said that *{vajHa'} and *{jaSHa'} don't work.  As for any 
>others, we just don't know.  Also, remember that some adverbials 
>already have an unrelated opposite - e.g. {nom} "fast, quickly" vs. 
>{QIt} "slowly"; {bong} "accidentally, by accident" vs. {chIch} 
>"purposely, on purpose, intentionally" - so adding {-Ha'} to these 
>probably won't work either.

but why not:
nomHa' = QIt
QitHa' = nom

is it wrong to have different ways to express the same idea?

if yes, maybe it's wrong to say *{vaSHa'} because there is a word to 
express the idea of "un-differently", which MO did not already 
reveal. what do you think?

also esperanto speakers often refer to the canons of the inventor. 
seemingly no one wants to criticize him, but he himself said that 
esperanto is the language of the esperanto speakers (as far as i 
know). did MO say something similar to this? or is it solely you 
decision to follow MO's canons? but what if he's wrong?


Back to archive top level