Re: help with "Floreat Majestas"

[Captain Krankor <krankor@yay.tim.org>]

> > > > nob "give"
> > > > nobHa' "ungive", "give back"
> > > >
> > > I might be missing something here so forgive me for asking but wouldn't
> > > [nobHa'],  be "take", "take back" as well as "ungive" rather than "give
> > > back"?
> >
> > It could certainly mean "take back".  Context would presumably make the
> > intended meaning clear.
> >
> > > If it could mean "give back" how would the following work (assuming it's
> > > correct anyway):
> > >
> > > taj nob SuvwI' vaj  taj nobHa' SuvwI'
> >
> > Well, I'm not sure what this would mean.  Certainly one could come up with
> > a context in which it would make sense, but lacking a context it's a
> little
> > hard to understand.  It would be more comprehensible, methinks, with ghIq
> > instead of vaj.
> 
> Methinks you are correct.. For context (missing because I wasn't sure if it
> was right)
> 
> nenwI'HeyvaD taj nob SuvwI' ghIq   chaghmo'  puqna'vo' taj nobHa' SuvwI'
> 
> "The Warrior gave a knife to the apparent adult then because he dropped it
> the warrior took it back from the definite child"

Sure, now I buy it.  I see no problem with it.

> But after reading Will's email on the subject I'm not so certain the idea
> even holds up as it involves taking back.

Don't be so quick to rush to judgement.  I haven't disputed Will on
this yet. {{;-)  Suffice it to say for now that I, for one, don't buy his
interpretation.


> Q. Can I use -vo' in this manner?

In which manner?  You lost me here.  In the manner you used it above?
Certainly!

	--Krankor