tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 24 02:55:20 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Qe'Daq maghoS/Qe' wIghoS (HQ3.3) final conclusion?
- From: "christoph.pichlmann" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Qe'Daq maghoS/Qe' wIghoS (HQ3.3) final conclusion?
- Date: 24 Jun 2005 11:55:23 +0200
I've been reading HolQeD Vol 3, number 3 today, and now I'm wondering
if the issue of "ghoS"(object?) did get any final conclusion(i.e. word
from Okrand).
In this issues "From the Grammarian's Desk", Captain Krankor concluded
that both "Qe'Daq maghoS" and "Qe' wIghoS" are valid.
I'd now like to know if they both are supposed to mean the same, or if
there actually is a difference.
I'd read "Qe'Daq maghoS" as "We're going to the (place where)
restaurant (is)", with a (possible) meaning(undertone?) of "We don't
know if the restaurant is still there, but we're going to the place
where it should be".
While "Qe' wIghoS" would mean "We're going to the restaurant", meaning
"No matter where it's actual location is, we're going there.".
(Note: It's quite likely someone else has said that before - I can't
search the (mailing list) archive to check it. Might be I read that
idea sometime and now merely remember it.)
Christoph