[584] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: mu' vInej
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri Apr 16 20:25:14 1993
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Ken_Beesley.PARC@xerox.com
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 16:05:23 PDT
In-Reply-To: "Mark_Nudelman@go:com:Xerox's message of Fri, 16 Apr 1993 03:27:00
>marqem writes:
>> "chechwI'" is good, but it's very general, meaning 'drunk-maker,
>> intoxicant'.
> Perhaps I don't understand the -wI' suffix. Since chech means
> "be drunk", I would have thought chechwI' meant "thing which
> is drunk, drunkard". (When I read d'Armond's original message,
> I thought he was asking for a word for jupDaj, not for "beer"!)
> I would have used chechmoHwI' for "intoxicant". What then would
> chechghach mean? This gets us back into the nominalization argument.
> --nachHegh
> Mark_Nudelman@go.com
chechwI' means "one who is drunk/drunkard" as Mark Nudelman suggests.
chechmoHwI' means "thing which causes to be drunk" or "intoxicant"
chechghach would mean something like "drunkenness", if my instincts are right
Ken Beesley
