[86641] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: The meaning of -moH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Wed Oct 7 21:17:10 2009
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 21:14:47 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
In-reply-to: <be8.5d5bec08.37fe9310@wmconnect.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
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
