[tlhIngan Hol] qep'a' webpage

[DloraH]

On Thu, 2017-07-06 at 11:57 -0400, SuStel wrote:
> On 7/6/2017 11:46 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> > If instead of {SoHtaHbe'chugh} we wrote {SoHbe'taHchugh}, and if 
> > instead of {vIta'pu'be'} we wrote {vIta'be'pu'}..
> >
> > 1. Would you accept these choices as equally correct ?
> > 2. Meaning-wise, would you find that they are any different ?
> 
> I would accept them as grammatically valid but not necessarily identical 
> in meaning.
> 
> The example with *ta'* is easier, because it's an actual verb. 
> *vIta'pu'be':* I didn't *ta'pu'. vIta'be'pu':* I did *ta'be'*. The 
> former describes a thing I might have done and says it didn't happen; 
> the latter describes a thing I DID do, which is the not-doing of 
> something. The distinction is subtle, and in most cases it wouldn't make 
> a difference which you used.
> 
> The one with *SoH* is messier because pronouns only act like verbs when 
> they interact with other words, and because it seems like *-taH* may be 
> required when the pronoun is combined with a locative, but that isn't 
> clear... If someone were to choose the other form than I did, I wouldn't 
> have a problem, and I wouldn't even be sure there is a significant 
> difference.
> 


Similar to the first example of 'not taking action' vs 'taking action to
not do something', (putting aside that -taH might be required with
locatives) I take [SoHtaHbe'] and [SoHbe'taH] as 'not being something'
vs 'being not something'.  Very subtle, probably no difference on the
streets, but in a philosophy class, I would see a bit difference.


- DloraH