[94592] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] -Ha' on adverbs
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Wed Sep 5 04:39:30 2012
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 18:39:06 +1000
In-Reply-To: <F52986192E9FE346B0B7EF3D6F98E87711C46F64@EXDB3.ug.kth.se>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============2336730086793172858==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_12c4133a-38d5-4eb4-91c5-56f57a028162_"
--_12c4133a-38d5-4eb4-91c5-56f57a028162_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Also for those who're interested=2C the adverb-Ha' question grew out of a d=
iscussion Qov and I had a few weeks back about the lack of a dedicated adve=
rb meaning "likewise=2C in the same way"=2C for which Qov proposed ?jaSHa'.=
(Qov deserves thanks for posting the adverb-Ha' info to the list=2C by the=
way. I=20
was the one who asked the question of Marc but couldn't immediately repost =
his=20
response=2C and Qov honourably passed the info
on as ghunchu'wI' and I were telling her about it at breakfast the next
morning. Qov=2C qatlho'.)
As Qov said=2C Marc basically implied that -Ha' is *grammatically* legal on=
any adverb=2C but for some it's semantically nonsensical. It was 'angghal =
who pointed out during the conversation that ??chaqHa' would be weird=2C an=
d ghunchu'wI' then thought of rut. So the sense we got is that while ??chaq=
Ha' or ??rutHa' are grammatically legal=2C they just aren't usefully meanin=
gful (like chIS'egh or HolDaq). ngugh=2C ghIq and DaH probably wouldn't wor=
k with -Ha' for the same reason.
ghItlhpu' loghaD=2C jatlh:
> Some speculative constructss:
Some of these I really like=2C and some I really don't. I won't go into any=
of them except this one:
> *wejHa' =3D "already"
> - *wejHa' ta'lI'. =3D "He/she is already working on it."
See=2C this one is really problematic. I would have thought wejHa' to mean =
"no longer=2C not any more"=2C and while discussing it at the aforementione=
d breakfast ghunchu'wI' noted another potential meaning (I don't remember i=
t=2C unfortunately) that was also logical.
QeS
=
--_12c4133a-38d5-4eb4-91c5-56f57a028162_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt=3B
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>
Also for those who're interested=2C the adverb-Ha' question grew out of a d=
iscussion Qov and I had a few weeks back about the lack of a dedicated adve=
rb meaning "likewise=2C in the same way"=2C for which Qov proposed ?jaSHa'.=
(Qov deserves thanks for posting the adverb-Ha' info to the list=2C by the=
way. I=20
was the one who asked the question of Marc but couldn't immediately repost =
his=20
response=2C and Qov honourably passed the info
on as ghunchu'wI' and I were telling her about it at breakfast the next
morning. Qov=2C qatlho'.)<br><br>As Qov said=2C Marc basically implied tha=
t -Ha' is *grammatically* legal on any adverb=2C but for some it's semantic=
ally nonsensical. It was 'angghal who pointed out during the conversation t=
hat ??chaqHa' would be weird=2C and ghunchu'wI' then thought of rut. So the=
sense we got is that while ??chaqHa' or ??rutHa' are grammatically legal=
=2C they just aren't usefully meaningful (like chIS'egh or HolDaq). ngugh=
=2C ghIq and DaH probably wouldn't work with -Ha' for the same reason.<br><=
br>ghItlhpu' loghaD=2C jatlh:<br>>=3B Some speculative constructss:<br><d=
iv><br>Some of these I really like=2C and some I really don't. I won't go i=
nto any of them except this one:<br><br>>=3B *wejHa' =3D "already"<br>>=
=3B - *wejHa' ta'lI'. =3D "He/she is already working on it."<br><br>See=2C=
this one is really problematic. I would have thought wejHa' to mean "no lo=
nger=2C not any more"=2C and while discussing it at the aforementioned brea=
kfast ghunchu'wI' noted another potential meaning (I don't remember it=2C u=
nfortunately) that was also logical.<br><br>QeS<br></div> </div>=
</body>
</html>=
--_12c4133a-38d5-4eb4-91c5-56f57a028162_--
--===============2336730086793172858==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============2336730086793172858==--
