<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/27/2016 2:06 AM, Rhona Fenwick
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SG2PR0301MB098414EDF0386B6DB158912AAA0F0@SG2PR0301MB0984.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>I'm firmly with be''etlh and ghunchu'wI' on this. The verb
{chIp} does not mean "cut hair, trim hair"; it means "cut,
trim". "Hair" disambiguates, but there's no reason to consider
it to exclude *everything* else<span>.</span> To take some
other examples, must the object of {weq} absolutely be a
percussion instrument (KGT: "<span>hit (percussion instrument)
with palm (v)"</span>)? Or does it just need to be anything
that I hit in the manner of a percussion instrument? I don't
see anything wrong with saying someone {qIvDu'Daj weqtaH} "is
drumming on their knees with their palms".</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>In that case, your knees are a percussion instrument. You haven't
deviated from the disambiguator at all.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote
cite="mid:SG2PR0301MB098414EDF0386B6DB158912AAA0F0@SG2PR0301MB0984.apcprd03.prod.outlook.com"
type="cite">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper"
style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p> Another instance is {ghoS}, defined in TKD as "<span>approach,
go away from, proceed, come, follow (a course)</span>". We
know from many, many canon examples that the object can, but
need not, be a course: it may be a destination, or indeed a
point of origin in the right context.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>All of which are available in the various verb forms listed.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>If Okrand had intended "(hair)" to be only an example to
disambiguate <i>trim,</i> I would have expected multiple
examples, to demonstrate that hair is only an example. "(hair,
bushes, grass)" We get this with <b>baH,</b> which gives us
"(torpedo, rocket, missile)," and not just "(torpedo)," which is
what the word was invented for. He could have given us
"(projectile)," in the manner of <b>weq</b> <i>hit (percussion
instrument),</i> but he didn't.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>In a couple of cases, Okrand <i>does</i> give us examples in
parentheses, and in these cases he actually says "e.g.": <b>laQ</b>
<i>fire, energize (e.g. thrusters);</i><b> Hach</b> <i>be
developed (e.g., civilization).</i></p>
<p><i><br>
</i></p>
<p>It simply does not follow Okrand's pattern to say that hair is
only one kind of thing that you can <b>chIp.</b> He wasn't giving
one possible example; he was telling us the sense of the verb.
This doesn't prevent you from using the verb beyond its literal
meaning, just as English doesn't prevent me from saying I'll give
the lawn a buzz cut.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>