[86346] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: {vIl} (was Re: News from Maltz)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Krenath)
Tue Jul 28 17:19:45 2009
From: Krenath <krenath@gmail.com>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
In-Reply-To: <f1d476f10907281344i546cec29pd1a82f549be8d30b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 17:17:05 -0400
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Heh. Since I'm currently on Twitter a lot, it reminds me a lot of the
way I think of Twitter followers.
Some of them are vIlle'pu'. People you know and like and follow you
because they like you.
And some are vIlpu'. They just show up in your followers list and you
have no idea what the heck prompted them to follow you.
On Jul 28, 2009, at 4:44 PM, "ghunchu'wI' 'utlh" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 8:48 AM, David Trimboli<david@trimboli.name>
> wrote:
>> Oh! It's the thing your aunt gave you which you don't know what it
>> is.
>>
>> So {vIl} means "someone or something one can always find around."
>
> I think that puts a little too much emphasis on the reliability of the
> thing or person. {vIl} strikes me more as referring to someone or
> something you keep noticing, rather than something or someone you
> would intentionally look for. When I asked Marc Okrand whether
> "sidekick" would be an appropriate term, he said no, and gave this
> example: "It would apply to this woman I know who seems to show up (as
> an audience member or an usher or something) at every play I go to. I
> don't know why she's always there, but it's weird."
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
>
>
>
