tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 05 04:32:16 2005
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: chenmoH/mojmoH (was Re: Klingon WOTD: cho' (verb))
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: chenmoH/mojmoH (was Re: Klingon WOTD: cho' (verb))
- Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 07:31:51 EST
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 11/4/2005 7:59:55 PM Central Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
> Really, the English "become" has two senses: the intransitive, non-copular
> sense meaning "to come into existence", and the transitive, copular sense
> meaning, well, "to become" or "to begin to be". If Klingon {moj} could refer
> to the first sense, then yes, I guess {chenmoH} and {mojmoH} would be
> synonyms, but as Voragh has shown, {moj} in Klingon has never been used in
> anything other than a transitive sense.
In English "become" is not transitive, although it is copular. What is the
difference between "come into existence" and "begin to be"? They seem
virtually the same to me.
Of course, Klingon "moj" is transitive, because it takes objects.
lay'tel SIvten