[Tlhingan-hol] qIHpu'ghach wa'DIch: 'ay' cha'

[De'vID jonpIn]

loghaD:
> qeylIS betleH would probably be held as a betleH'a', but it's not called
qeylIS betleH'a'; it receives its grandeur from being prefixed by "qeylIS".
If you were to refer to qeylIS betleH'a', I'd assume you were talking about
the greatest of his many betleHmey.

How would you interpret the following?
{qeylIS mIv'a'}
{qeylIS Daqtagh'a' DuQwI'Hommey}
{lopno' 'uQ'a'}

I don't think {qeylIS betleH} is a {betleH'a'} merely by virtue of being
associated with Kahless, unless it was already considered a {betleH'a'} by
itself.  Kahless can carry a {tajHom}, just like anybody else.

loghaD:
> Likewise, the telmey of a neghvar are perhaps tel'a'mey when compared to
the telDu' of a bird or even the telmey of a toQDuj, but if you were to
refer to neghvar tel'a'mey, the idea I'd get is "the Negh'Var's main wings".

I also get the idea "the Negh'Var's main wings", but I think we arrive at
this meaning differently:
{[neghvar tel]['a'][mey]} "[the Negh'Var's [main] wings]" vs.
{[neghvar] [tel'a'mey]} "[the Negh'Var's] [main wings]"

I think {tel'a'} by itself has a meaning "main-wing".  This isn't clear in
English because it's two words (i.e., we don't have a single word to
describe the thing that {tel'a'} refers to), but consider {telHom}, which
we can perhaps render using a word such as "flap".  Like {mIv'a'}, I think
{telHom} is not just a {tel} that has a relative relationship to regular
{tel}, but its own type of {tel}.  A {telHom} isn't just a "wing which is
small", but a "small-wing", a "flap".

This is how I understand {SoSbor'a'} as well.  A ship can have a {De'wI'
SoSbor'a'} "main computer core", independently of whether it has any other
computer cores.

This is also how we can have {qepHom} which are bigger than {qep'a'}. {{:-)

loghaD:
> Consider also a pilllow might be called QongDaq buqHom (and a sleeping
bag a QongDaq buq'a'), and a pants pocket a yopwaH buq. To me, this
supports the idea that -'a' and -Hom are distinctions within a category
(most of the time, at least; in natural language, I'd expect there to be
plenty of exceptions).

So {buq} is a word that we have different English words for, depending on
their relative size/function.  For example, "sack", "bag", "pocket",
"purse", "pouch".  A pillow could be called a {QongDaq buqHom} (something
like "bed purse"), whereas a sleeping bag is a {QongDaq buq'a'} (something
like "bed sack"), and a pants pocket is just {yopwaH buq} "pants pocket".
I'd still parse {QongDaq buqHom} as {[QongDaq] [buqHom]} rather than
{[QongDaq buq][Hom]}.

--
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20120130/ab4e5320/attachment-0001.html>