tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 20 12:05:18 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: mu'qaD veS (was Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey)

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, David Trimboli wrote:
> >qo' DuleghmoHlaHbogh qechlIj wuv vIt
> >"Truth depends on your ideas which allow you to see the world."
> I think you've got wrong prefix and suffixes there.  I read "Truth depends
> on the world your idea which causes you to be able to see."
> You wanted
> qo' Dalegh 'e' luchaw'bogh qechlIj wuv vIt.
> Truth depends on your ideas which permit that you see the world.

Nah, I forgot the { -'e' } marker for the head noun, I think is the big
problem, and I put the wrong prefix on { legh }:

qo' DaleghmoHlaHbogh qechlIj'e' wuv vIt
"Truth depends on your ideas which enable you to see the world."

I think there's a subtle, but key difference with your version, though
this may be a personal connotation.  I always saw { chaw' } as something
not related to ability, but to things like rules or outside intervention.
Something like the difference between "I can't see it" where the reasoning
is inability (ie. blind or in a bad position) { vIleghlaHbe' } and where
the reasoning is "I'm not allowed to see it" { vIleghbe' net chaw' }.

In this case, I'm talking about "enablement"; "your ideas enable you to
see the world", and "truth depends on those ideas"...  Do you see the same
distinction, or am I taking the connotation of { chaw' } too discretely?

> >Ha' mu'qaD veS wItagh!  bagh'egh DaQlIj 'e' yIchaw'Qo'  ;)
> qatlh jechvetlh DatuQtaH . . . ?  toH, qablIj 'oH'a' jay'?!?

He'qu' SoSlI'; veQDuj rur!  yuQ latlh  vIbavtaHvIS ghaH vIlarghtaH!


 **        Have a question that reality just can't answer?        **
  ** Visit Project Galactic Guide **
                     "Isis! Isis! Ra! Ra! Ra!"

Back to archive top level