[tlhIngan Hol] expressing "approximately" with {chaq} and {tlhoS} the lesson from {vabDot} where {chaq} and {tlhoS} refer

[SuStel]

On 3/16/2022 9:11 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> Suppose I write:
>
> vabDot Dochvam je'qang verengan
>
> There are three possible interpretations based on context:
>
> 1. Even a ferengi would be willing to buy this thing
> 2. A ferengi would be even willing to buy this thing
> 3. A ferengi would be willing to buy even this thing

*vabDot:* means the thing said is unexpected, surprising, or 
counterintuitive.

*vabDot Dochvam je'qang verengan.*/It is unexpected, surprising, or 
counterintuitive that a Ferengi is willing to buy this thing./


> Now suppose that instead of the adverb {vabDot} we use the adverb 
> {chaq}/{tlhoS}:
>
> chaq/thoS wej qama' HoHpu' wa'maH yaS
>
> Again, in a similar to {vabDot} manner, there are three possible 
> interpretations based on context:
>
> 1. Perhaps/almost ten officers killed three prisoners
> 2. Ten officers perhaps/almost killed three prisoners
> 3. Ten officers killed perhaps/almost three prisoners

*chaq:* means the thing said might be true.

*chaq wej qama' HoHpu' wa'maH yaS.*/It might be true that ten officers 
killed three prisoners./

*tlhoS:* means the thing said is almost, but not quite, true.

*tlhoS wej qama' HoHpu' wa'maH yaS.*/It is almost, but not quite, true 
that ten officers killed three prisoners./

You're hung up on trying to apply adverbials directly to individual 
parts of a sentence, but that's not what they're for. It's true that any 
of those three parts being unexpected, possibly true, or almost true 
might be what triggers the use of the adverbial, but the sentence 
doesn't /mean/ any one of those three interpretations. Any of them could 
have caused the sentence, but you can't go backwards to find the 
original cause.


> Of course "perhaps"/"almost" is/are different from "approximately". 
> But the conclusion I'm getting at is that..
>
> We *can* use {chaq} and {tlhoS} with the intention that -if the 
> context's right- they can be understood as applying to the 
> subject/object instead of the verb, the way {vabDot} does.
>
> Right?

Adverbials (not including the exceptional *neH*) don't apply to 
individual words. They apply to entire clauses. It might be that one 
given word represents the component that caused you to include the 
adverbial, but the adverbial doesn't tell you that.

Does a sentence add additional information that is surprising or 
unexpected? Use *vabDot.* Does a sentence describe something that only 
might be true? Use *chaq.* Does a sentence describe something that 
almost comes true, but doesn't? Use *tlhoS.* These words don't tell you 
which part of the sentence is the cause of the unexpectedness, 
maybe-ness, or almost-ness, but they do tell you that something was 
unexpected, maybe true, or almost true.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220316/a0596219/attachment-0015.htm>