tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 17 07:36:40 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: chagh

Steven Boozer (

> > 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.

>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
>  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

   [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.

Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level