[84962] in tlhIngan-Hol
RE: "Update"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Boozer)
Tue Aug 5 10:27:57 2008
From: Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
To: "'tlhingan-hol@kli.org'" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 09:25:23 -0500
In-Reply-To: <CB73919C-5626-4578-B700-5EF258E5A0E3@alcaco.net>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Fiat Knox:
>> I just considered putting forward the case for
>>
>> notlhHa'choHmoH
>> (cause a change in the thing such that it ceases to be
>> obsolete),
ghunchu'wI':
> I'd just say {notlhHa'moH}.
>
> There are relatively few occasions where many verb suffixes are
> appropriate on a general translation for a given word. In this case,
> {-choH} is basically unnecessary unless you really want to focus on
> the act of changing the state.
A few more examples of {-choH}:
bIr be cold
bIrchoH grow cold
Doq be red, be orange
DoqchoH redden ("become red, change to red")
jot be calm
jotchoH calm down
> {-Ha'} can already imply the "change"
> idea (I don't have TKD handy, but I recall it saying that {Do'Ha'}
> suggests a turn of luck from good to bad).
Here's the set from TKD:
Do'
be fortunate, be lucky
maDo'Ha'
We are (always) unlucky.
maDo'be'
We are not lucky.
maDo'choH
We are becoming lucky. We are undergoing a turn of luck.
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
