tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 23 10:04:54 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
yopwaH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<<Semantics: Primes and universals>> qon Anna Wierzbicka.
paqvam nav Dop wejvatlh chorghmaH cha'Daq <<mu' <pants> (yopwaH) ghajbe' wa'
Dol DIp buv 'ej 'oH ghajbe' Dol law' DIp buv. mu' ghaj DIp buv pIm. DIp buv
law' ghaj DIvI' Hol. cha' Dol DIp buv 'oHlaw' DIp buvvam.>>(1) ghItlh.
nav Dop wejvatlh chorghmaH loSDaq <<'uSDu' chevbogh Sut'e' lu'oS yopwaH,
yopwaH run, rurbogh latlh Sut je. pIm 'uSDu' qatbogh Sut. qatbogh Sut lu'oS mop
paH je. jaS chevbogh Sut, qatbogh Sut je DIbuv 'e' lupoQ DIvI' nugh qech
potlh. lurDech pablu'taHvIS, chevbogh Sut lutuQ loDpu' neH. vIHchu' loD 'e'
chaw' chevbogh Sut. lurDech pablu'taHvIS, qatbogh Sut lutuQ be'pu' neH. vaj
porgh 'ay''e' luleghbe'nIS latlhpu' Qan Sut.>>(2) ghItlh Wierzbicka.
(1) <<The word *pants* is neither singular nor plural. Rather, it belongs to
a separate category (one among several categories of English nouns) which can
be called "dual".>> p. 382
(2) <<Trousers, shorts, pants, and so on can all be thought of as
"separate-leg garments", in contrast to "wrap-arounds" such as skirts and dress. This
distinction between "separate-leg garments" and "wrap-arounds" involves an
important cultural principle. Traditionally (in the English-speaking world),
"separate-leg garments" were associated with men, to whom they accorded a full
freedom of movement, whereas "wrap-around" were associated with women, thus
providing a symbolic protection (including visual protection) to the taboo area of
the body.>> p. 384
lay'tel SIvten
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}
![[Hol taghwI']](/pics/level1_big.png "[Hol taghwI']"){kind=small}