tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 17 07:36:40 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: chagh
Doq:
> > I'm putting together a dictionary for my own use. I'm wondering if we
> > have any canon to reveal whether the subject of {chagh} is the object
> > losing altitude, or the person releasing the descending object.
ghunchu'wI':
>A little over a year ago, nobody objected to {chagh} being listed as
>unused in canon. I don't think that has changed in the meantime.
Correct. AFAIK It's never been used.
>I feel that the existence of the word {pum} "fall" is sufficient
>reason to consider {chagh} "drop" to have the falling object as
>the...um...object. But there's no canonical evidence for using it
>one way or the other.
I would agree with ghunchu'wI'.
BTW Okrand wrote WRT {pum} "fall" on st.klingon (11/05/99):
... that is, "fall down" or "fall off of something"
presumably to distinguish it from {lu} "fall (suffer loss of status), fall
from power".
Note that we also have the related verbs {ghIr} "descend" and {roQ} "put
down". Unfortunately, neither of them have been used in canon either.
In cases like these, it's useful to look at antonyms for possible clues as
to usage. If {woH} "pick up" is indeed the antonym of {chagh}, then we can
see that the direct object is the...um...object:
yIwoH!
[Pick him up! (untranslated)] ST6
teplIj yIwoH 'ej pa'lIjDaq yIjaH
Pick up your baggage and go to your room. CK
FYI we also have {Sal} "ascend" and {pep} "raise" - neither used in canon.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons