[Tlhingan-hol] (no subject)

[Robyn Stewart]

Daj. jIjatlhchugh <ngaSwI'vamDaq Doq 'op paSlogh 'ej SuD 'op paSlogh> 
bIjatlh'a' <chay' nguv latlh paSlogh?>?

That is, if I said "some socks in this container are red and some are 
blue," you would feel that as the red and blue contingents each 
represented less than half, that there must be more socks of a colour 
I haven't yet specified, required to make up the entirety of my sock 
collection?

I might respond that way if the sentence were <ngaSwI'vamDaq Doq 
paSlogh puS 'ej SuD paSlogh puS>, but I might also just assume that 
there were only a few socks total in there.

At 13:47 17/10/2011, you wrote:
>I still see it as part of a simple progression:
>
>none - some - half -  most   - all
>pagh - 'op  - bID  - HochHom - Hoch
>
>
>YMMV.
>
>--
>Voragh
>Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ghunchu'wI' 'utlh [mailto:qunchuy at alcaco.net]
> >
> > ja' Voragh:
> >> It might just be my dialect, but {'op} "some" implies "few" or
> >> at least "not many"... I think of {'op} as being the opposite
> >> of {HochHom} "most, greater part",...
> >
> > I too disagree with that understanding. I think {'op} just means an
> > unspecified number. It implies a number greater than zero, and I
> > wouldn't use it when the number is likely to be all of the population
> > being considered, but I don't know that doing so would be wrong.
> >
> > -- ghunchu'wI'
>
>_______________________________________________
>Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
>http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol