<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/26/2019 11:34 AM, De'vID wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+7zAmM9f_UuNJmVd16cvcaSYJuhAdNkRyOkEGh9KLEVGTwUwA@mail.gmail.com">
<div>At the 2014 Saarbrücken {qepHom'a'} (and possibly on other
occasions), Okrand made a remark along the lines that,
generally, if there's a {QeD}, there's a corresponding {tej}.
Sometimes he explicitly reveals a {tej} for a {QeD}, but
sometimes he doesn't.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Do people who maintain lexicons for themselves generally add
the corresponding {tej} when a {QeD} is revealed, for
consistency and convenience? I'm in the unusual position* that I
maintain a lexicon (the {boQwI'} database) which is used mostly
by other people, so if I have an entry for "quantum physicist"
(because Okrand revealed {'otlhQeD} and {'otlhtej} together),
and an entry for {HapQeD} "physics" but *not* a corresponding
entry for {Haptej} "physicist", it looks inconsistent.</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Don't worry how it looks. You're not in the business of filling
in gaps in the given vocabulary, just reporting the given
vocabulary.</p>
<p>We don't <i>know</i> that every <b>QeD</b> has a corresponding
<b>tej;</b> just that they <i>generally</i> do. So if someone
wants to coin <b>roSqa'tej</b> <i>archaeologist </i>on the
assumption that we know <b>roSqa'QeD</b> is <i>archaeology,</i>
well, they've got a pretty strong reason to do so, and I for one
wouldn't complain. But we don't <i>know</i> that that's right, so
it shouldn't be added to a dictionary that's trying to be
accurate.</p>
<p>In other words, it's okay to leave out some stuff that we might
think "well, obviously" when there's no actual proof of the
obvious. You might even make a point in the <b>roSqa'QeD</b>
entry that most sciences have a <b>tej</b> counterpart, and that
<b>roSqa'tej</b> would be the obvious choice for <i>archaeologist,</i>
but that this word has not been observed or confirmed.</p>
<p>This reasoning goes for your other questions.</p>
<p>Besides, since Okrand has been so accommodating in recent years,
maybe someone can just ask him about <b>roSqa'</b> and <b>roSqa'tej</b>
(and <b>roSHa'moH,</b> while they're at it).<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>