tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 09 19:48:17 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: {Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'
- From: "QeS lagh" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: {Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 13:47:37 +1000
- Bcc:
mujangpu' SIvten. ghItlhpu':
>maybe {Hov} is broader in meaning than simple "star", so that it could be
>used for "sun". i like QeS lagh's {Hov'a'}.
qatlho'. With regard to your first point, this is how my idea of just saying
{Hovmaj} works: "our star". In defence of DloraH's argument, though, he's
very likely right in that {Hov'a'} wasn't the original word for "sun".
taH:
> but by the same token, ALL of the {Hov} words for "sun" would fit as
>well, IF {Hov} means something more like "aster" (of greek etymology),
>i.e., any glowing heavenly body seen from a planet surface. even in
>english people still typically call the planets stars when they look up at
>the sky.
bIlughqu'. <po Hov> lujatlhDI' Human, yuQ {Venus}'e' lu'oSmoH.
The only problem I have with {pemHov} and {juHHov} is that maybe we should
just use {pem Hov} and {juH Hov} until we find out more about the compound
nouns. We can use suffixes in places in the noun-noun construction that are
impossible in the compound noun: {tlhInganpu' juHna' HovHey} "the apparent
star of the Klingons' true home". But I'm still not entirely sure about how
productive compound nouns can be.
BTW: SuStel Holtej je: DIpmey'e' chenmoHlu'pu'bogh SughoHpu'DI', nuq bowuq?
chenmoHlaH'a' vay', pagh chennISmoHbe''a' vay'?
SuStel and Holtej: What did you decide with respect to compound nouns? I
recall you exchanged theories on the subject a little while ago.
taHqa' SIvten jabbI'ID:
>how can "{Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'?" be said using good grammar?
I was just using that in the subject line for effect. It'd be like saying
"To sun or not to sun", equally ungrammatical, in English (and,
incidentally, I was trying to evoke that line from Hamlet: <<taH pagh
taHbe'>> "to be or not to be"). If we were to go about it grammatically, I
would lose marks on at least three, and probably four, counts:
1) My "sentence" lacks true verbs entirely;
2) it uses a verb suffix on a noun;
3) it links two nouns with a conjunction normally reserved for sentences
only;
4) it should probably use the type 9 suffix {-'a'} "interrogative" on both
verbs.
The only other thing to be done is misspell it. {{:)
qech rap QummeH, mu'tlheghna'vam rurbogh mu'tlhegh'e' yIlo':
{Hov'a'} lo'laH'a' vay', pagh {Hov'a'} lo'laHbe''a' vay'?
(Can one use "Great Star", or can one not use "Great Star"?)
While I don't condone using things like <<{Hov'a'} pagh {Hov'a'}be'?>> in
connected speech (or writing), I think you'll agree a subject line that
reads <<{Hov'a'} lo'laH'a' vay', pagh {Hov'a'} lo'laHbe' vay'?>> lacks a bit
of punch, qar'a'? {{:D
Savan.
QeS lagh
_________________________________________________________________
You could be a genius! Find out by taking the IQ Test 2003. $5.50 (incl
GST). Click here: http://sites.ninemsn.com.au/minisite/testaustralia/