[tlhIngan Hol] Why not vay'pu'/vay'mey ?

nIqolay Q niqolay0 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 4 11:58:33 PDT 2019


On Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 1:47 PM mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> SuStel:
> > Is it a question of understanding, or is it a question of how
> > it is correctly done?
>
> hmm.. Good question..
>
> So, lets deal with the "how it is correctly done".
>
> For vay'pu' I would choose 'op nuv, and for vay'mey I would choose 'op
> Doch (if I was referring to things).
>
> Would you agree with these choices ?
>

Those are fine. (I wouldn't quite say they're necessarily more correct than
*vay'pu'* or *vay'mey*, but rather that they're simply more certain to be
correct. There are any number of uncertain phrases and sentences that might
be correct but that can be rephrased into things that we know are fine.)

If there were any difference at all, I'd probably interpret *vay'pu' *as
being even less specific than *'op nuv*. The latter is just unspecific
about the number of people, while *vay'pu'* doesn't even bother explicitly
referring to "people". Same with *'op Doch* vs. *vay'mey* (although *Doch*
isn't very specific in the first place.)

Possibly relevantly, there is an instance in the paq'batlh of *vay'* being
used with a number:


>
> *ghu' Dachupbogh vIlaj    'ach wa' vay' vIpoQ    'e' Dachaw'chugh neH*
>
>
> *I will accept your proposal,    But only if you grant me    One
> condition:*
>

Or, more literally: "I accept the situation you suggest / but only if you
permit that / I demand one something."
(paq'raD, Canto 16, lines 19-21, page 144-145)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190404/6f8e0033/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list