[97205] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] do {vIttlhegh} become {ngo'} or {qan}?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Wed Sep 11 09:04:14 2013
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 09:03:26 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmOJ1K9kdZdm+rW+=6YOeWhxfmWfkP=AVPu40dnV1ZCRgA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 9/11/2013 7:42 AM, De'vID wrote:
> De'vID:
>>> So KGT rules out {ngo'} applied to people.
>
> DloraH:
>> Does it rule it out? When talking about people, typically one is discussing age.
>
> "The word {ngo'} in the phrase above means old as opposed to new.
> Thus, it would be applied to objects or ideas, but not to animals or
> people."
>
> It certainly rules out something like {nuv ngo'} or {tlhIngan ngo'}.
I see no "certainly" about it. Okrand wasn't ruling out all possibility
of using {ngo'} with people; he is just explaining that when one it
talking about an elderly person, the correct verb is {qan}, not {ngo'}.
You're being too absolute with his text.
> DloraH:
>> A new chancellor is not necessarily young. He could be 100 years old, but became chancellor just
>> yesterday.
>
> qen Qang moj. DaH che'bogh Qang ghaH.
>
> The problem with {Qang ngo'} is that I'm not sure if it means
> "(current) chancellor who has been serving for a long time" or "former
> chancellor (who is no longer serving in that position)". Klingon makes
> a finer distinction than English for "old (not young)" and "old (not
> new)"; but it doesn't make the distinction between "old (not recent)"
> and "old (not current)".
Context will give you this information, as it does in English.
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
