tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 30 16:09:02 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {tIq} and {run}
Am 30.10.2002 15:57:37, schrieb "Agnieszka Solska" <[email protected]>:
>Can {tIq} and {run} be regarded as a pair of antonyms?
No.
Now I probably need to prove this :-)
1. Marc Okrand made most of the pairs as real pairs, but {tIq} and {run} appeared in two different
books. This is not quite convincing though.
2.
{tIq} is "be long, lengthy (of an object)"
----> This descriibes something that has a length.
Canon example:
"river": {bIQtIq} "long water"
{tajtIq} "long knife"
(a knife with a particularly long blade that is used almost as if it were a sword)
{run} is "be short (in stature)"
----> This descriibes something that has a height, a stature.
Canon example, KGT 152:
"There are a number of standard counterparts to {Hom} [slang for weakling], such as pujwI'
(weakling), langwI' (one who is thin), and runwI' (one who is short)"
So, a {runwI'} is obviously a "shorty", a person who is not tall.
That's not the antonym of being long.
Quvar
Beginners' Grammarian
ghojwI'pu'wI' vISaH