tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Oct 07 18:16:45 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: The meaning of -moH

David Trimboli (david@trimboli.name) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']



MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com wrote:
> In a message dated 10/7/2009 20:29:31 Eastern Daylight Time, 
> doq@embarqmail.com writes:
>> tlhob: [TKD: ask], [TKD appendix: request, ask, plead]
>> 
>> ghel: [KGT: ask (a question)]
>> 
>> The definition suggests that the direct object of {ghel} should be
>> a question and not a person.
 >
> {tlhob} had the meaning of {ghel} only up until {ghel} was introduced
> by Okrand. As for "question" being the direct object of {ghel}, the
> note "(a question)" after "ask" is only to disambiguate the meanings
> of "ask", not to suggest its normal object. The form of
> disambiguation is itself ambiguous, of course. Okrand doesn't explain
> how the notes in parentheses are to be interpreted; he just uses them
> as if it were clear what he meant. Another example is "qI' - sign (a
> treaty)" (TKD1K, TKD2E).

Before anyone gets all worked up about over this, ask yourself: if 
{ghel} *can* take an object, what word could it possibly be? We don't 
have a noun for "question"...

-- 
SuStel
tlhIngan Hol MUSH
http://trimboli.name/mush






Back to archive top level