[98749] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Robyn Stewart)
Mon Jun 2 18:53:02 2014
From: "Robyn Stewart" <robyn@flyingstart.ca>
To: "tlhIngan Hol mailing list" <tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org>
In-Reply-To: <F52986192E9FE346B0B7EF3D6F98E877123D58FB@EXDB3.ug.kth.se>
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 15:52:43 -0700
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
I thought of that, and decided that " is undergoing a chemical
transformation associated with heat" applies equally well to the burning
gases that compose visible flames as to the material that release gases when
heated, so that I could consider them one concept. But I do agree that it's
a special case.
I imagine my beta testers will help me tl;dr the meQ section anyway. :-)
- Qov
-----Original Message-----
From: Felix Malmenbeck [mailto:felixm@kth.se]
Sent: June 2, 2014 15:25
To: Robyn Stewart; tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Subject: RE: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH
I'll see if I can get you all the paq'batlh uses tomorrow; can't access my
transcript at the moment.
Would like to share what could be regarded as a fourth use of <meQ>, though:
I've never seen it written down, but in the opening of the song from <qul
tuq> in the Star Trek: Klingon game, I'm fairly certain they sing <'o meQ
qul! 'o meQ chal!>
<meQ qul> is interesting to me; I'd long wondered if this was permissible.
After all, while we're used to fires "burning" in English, fires can not be
burnt, mor can they be on fire, so we can't assume that they can <meQ>. For
a fire, "burning" is more or less synonymous with "existing".
Of course, it could well be that what's really meant is "the fire burns
(that which touches it)", in the sense that <Soj meQ vutwI'>, in which case
this wouldn't be another use at all.
________________________________________
From: Robyn Stewart [robyn@flyingstart.ca]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2014 22:41
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH
To the best of my knowledge, I have cited all the canon sentences with ghor
and meQ below. There may be something in the paq'batlh, which I have beside
me, but lacking a concordance, it's hard to use it find usages.
- Robyn
-----Original Message-----
From: SuStel [mailto:sustel@trimboli.name]
Sent: June 2, 2014 12:57
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Objects with -moH
On 6/2/2014 3:46 PM, Robyn Stewart wrote:
> Something that IS on the syllabus are the words meQ and ghor, and I >
want to tell the students how to use them.
>
> TKD would suggest that usage is:
> meQ veQ. - The garbage burns.
> veQ meQmoH loDHom. - The boy burns the garbage.
>
> But canon says:
> Ha'DIbaHmey meQ Sop.
> to'waQ meQ vutwI'
> meQtaHbogh qachDaq Suv qoH neH.
> pIpyuS DaSop DaneHchugh pIpyuS puS DaghornIS.
> pel'aQDaj ghorpa'
>
> Three completely different uses for meQ and two for ghor.
Have we ever seen {ghor} used to mean that the subject is broken?
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
