tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 10 14:53:08 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: tuQ (was: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv)

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: tuQ (was: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv)
• Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.6

> > > > tlhaqDaj tuQmoH
> > > cause to wear?
> >
> > I agree it sounds weird, but that's how it's glossed in TKD.
> >
> > tuQmoH  -  put on (clothes) (v)
> 
> I think it's supposed to work as follows:
> 
> tuQHa'moH
> undress (someone)
> 
> tuQmoH
> dress (someone) ("cause someone to wear")

But the glosses in TKD do not include "(someone)".
 

> 'avwI' vul tuQHa'moH qama'.
> The prisoner undresses the unconscious guard.

I agree that this is a more logical usage, if he hadn't given us any suffixed 
glosses.


canon:
>>>
qogh vItuQmoHHa'pu'
I've taken off my belt.
(slang for "Your secret's safe with me.")
<<<

Except for the typo of the placement of -Ha', MO used this as he has it 
glossed.  The subject is not undressing another person; there is no -'egh 
either.  The object is the clothing he is taking off of himself.


DloraH

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: tuQ (was: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv)
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• References:
  • RE: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv
    • From: [email protected]
  • RE: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv
    • From: Lieven Litaer <[email protected]>
  • RE: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv
    • From: [email protected]
  • tuQ (was: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv)
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: ngeQ (v)
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: ngeQ (v)
• Prev by thread: KLINGON RPG SIMMING - ranks
• Next by thread: Re: tuQ (was: HoD tlhaq Duy'choHmoH 'Iv)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level