tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat May 22 23:32:29 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: paghHu'/paghleS

Alan Anderson ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

ja' lay'tel SIvten:
>I overstated when I said that I gave the words a novel meaning.  I pointed
>out the OBVIOUS meanings of these latent words.

Qo'.  bo'Dagh pup Dalo'pu'.  qechlIj DaHubneS DaneHchugh, qamevQo', 'ach
vIt vIHubnIS jIH.

You didn't overstate anything.  After you pointed out the obvious "zero
days ago/from now" = "today" meanings, you proposed the novel, unobvious,
and unofficial "earlier/later today" interpretations.  From your note of
Friday, May 21:

>While both of these words basically do mean 'today', each adds its own
>essential nuance. Since {Hu'} indicates a past time, and {leS} indicates a
>future
>time, {paghHu'} means 'earlier today', and {paghleS} means 'later today'.

The "essential nuance" you refer to appears to be your own invention.  You
went on to say:

>These forms are concise and specific, conforming in particular to the Klingon
>ideals of Accuracy and Straightforwardness.

I disagree.  They do not represent accuracy.  They are not the product of
information that is known to be correct.  They are the product of
*speculation*.

Argument from authority is a weak and dangerous debating tactic, but I have
to point out that you have two recognized authorities telling you that what
you're trying here goes into uncharted territory.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level