tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 15 22:35:51 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Tao Te Ching; Chp. 47

> qo' naQ DaSovchoHmeH lojmIt DaveghnISbe'.
> You don't need to step through your door
>    to know the whole world.

/qo' naQ/ is much the same as /naQbogh qo'/.
You know a world which is whole... as opposed to one that has been cut in

qo' Hoch - all of the world; the world's all; every piece that is the world.

There are two pies.  One is whole (naQ).  Another is missing a slice
(naQbe').  Mr Bob comes in and eats all of a pie; a pie tin is now empty.
Did he eat all of the whole pie (naQbogh chab Hoch), or did he eat all of
the partial pie (naQbe'bogh chab Hoch).

> [B] {yajchu'wI'}: I would have liked to use your own (I mean DloraH's)
> {valchu'wI'} (ghIlghameS, p.12) but it was too much like {valwI'} "one who
> is clever" and I needed this particular form to translate "the clever
> who are mentioned in the text a few times, and who are definitely not like
> the sage. Besides, the taoist "sage" (chinese: sheng ren ) is not someone
> who is clever or learned but one who has profound understanding of how the
> universe works. {yajchu'wI'}, "one who understands perfectly" seemed the
> right choice.

I can see the difference in usage.  In ghIlghameS the sages had much
knowledge and instructed the humans on how to do things, how to make things,
how to be "smart" and "clever" to manipulate materials into tools and such.
Your usage here deals with "understanding" the world/universe in which we


Back to archive top level