tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 17 08:47:58 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: chagh

Doq (doq@embarqmail.com)



I apologize for having problems with this. It seems to me that there  
is a degree of arbitration here that extends beyond that which is  
obviously justified.

You want to say that {chagh} is the anonym of  {woH}, and back that up  
by saying we don't need an intransitive version of {chagh} because we  
already have {pum}. Here's why this doesn't work for me:

{woH} already has an obvious antonym in {roQ}.
{Sal} already has an obvious antonym in {ghIr}.
{pum} is different from any of these words, in that it implies a lack  
of control over the rate of descent, and every other word here, except  
{chagh} implies a context of controlled motion.

In English, I can drop my pencil to the floor, or I can drop to the  
floor. I can pick up my pencil and I can pick myself up. I do not drop  
myself to the floor. I just drop to the floor. I do not pick up. I  
pick up myself. So "pick up" and "drop" are not exactly antonyms the  
way that "pick up" and "put down" are antonyms.

I see "drop" as something closer to the English "move" in that I can  
move my pencil or I can just move, just like I can drop my pencil, or  
I can just drop.

The verb {vIH} has been fairly well established as requiring {-moH} to  
be transitive. So, why is {chagh} different?

I also think about the difference between {pum} and {chagh} and it  
seems subtle; that {chagh} implies a form of release initiating the  
fall, while {pum} can result from losing balance, stepping off of a  
platform or many other starting points.

It's like {pum} is closer to {-taH} while {chagh} is closer to {- 
choH}. {pum} doesn't care how you started falling. It just cares about  
the fact that the subject is flowing with gravity without restriction  
beyond wind resistance, while {chagh} is all about the release and the  
moment after the release.

Trying to gain other insights here, I look for Klingon to have verbs  
for "toss" or "throw" to see how they might relate to "drop", and I  
find that Klingon doesn't have any of these verbs. There's {chuH}, but  
that is fairly specific about the object being thrown, and there's  
{jaD} and {woD}, but they are, again, much more specific in their  
meaning than the more generic English "throw". Similarly, {baQ}  
doesn't come close to the generic quality of "toss".

So, if Klingon lacks generic verbs for "toss" and "throw", why would  
they have one for "drop"? Again, {chagh} seems like it might more  
closely relate to {vIH} and {pum}. The most generic is {vIH}, while  
{pum} and {chagh} add the association with the direction and  
acceleration of gravity, and {chagh} adds the focus on there being a  
release point initiating the motion.

Or perhaps I'm just thinking about this too much...

Doq

On Dec 17, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Steven Boozer wrote:

> 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
>
>
>






Back to archive top level