<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/16/2021 8:05 AM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:luis.chaparro@web.de">luis.chaparro@web.de</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-a6afb459-2a06-43fe-9df7-5d9762b868d8-1637067952873@3c-app-webde-bap38">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Thanks to both of you for your replies! I still have a couple of questions:
1. I think the fact that I'm not an English native speaker is making this point a bit more difficult to me than it already is. If I understand it right, *vISay'nISmoH* means something like *I need to do something in order to keep the state of cleanliness of my hair*, i.e., *I need to do something that causes my hair to stay in a clean state*, so that's something we probably wouldn't say if our hair were really dirty? Maybe we're rather talking about *hair care* in a general sense?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Lacking <b>-choH</b> does not mean that a change of state does
not take place; it simply means you're not expressing one. <b>Say'moH</b>
doesn't mean <i>maintain being clean,</i> although it might be
used for that. It means the subject is the cause of being clean.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-a6afb459-2a06-43fe-9df7-5d9762b868d8-1637067952873@3c-app-webde-bap38">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">2. But if I want to cook and my hands are dirty, then the right thing to say would be: *vISay'nISchoHmoH*, wouldn't it?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I'd probably say it that way, yes.</p>
<p><b>Say'nISmoH</b> means you need to be the cause of being clean.
<b>Say'nISchoHmoH</b> means you need to be the cause of becoming
clean. It's the difference between <i>being</i> and <i>becoming.</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-a6afb459-2a06-43fe-9df7-5d9762b868d8-1637067952873@3c-app-webde-bap38">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">3. And if we want to say something like *embellish*? This word can mean either going from ugly to beautiful or from beautiful to more beautiful. How could we account for this difference in Klingon?</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>In the right context, going from not-beautiful to beautiful could
be expressed with <b>'IHchoHmoH.</b> If you just said <b>'IHmoH,</b>
then the subject is the cause of the beauty but hasn't necessarily
changed anything during the expression.</p>
<p>Going from beautiful to more beautiful? Probably <b>'IHqu'choHmoH.</b><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-a6afb459-2a06-43fe-9df7-5d9762b868d8-1637067952873@3c-app-webde-bap38">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">4. I'm afraid now I have again problems with this sentence: *yIbItHa'qu''eghmoH*. Shouldn't we use here *-choH*, since we are commanding someone to be the cause of her / his *changing* state from nervous to relaxed?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>It's commanding you to be the cause of your being calm. <i>Cause
yourself to be in a calm state</i> instead of <i>Cause yourself
to change to a calm state.</i> It's focusing on the end result,
not the moment of change. We don't usually make this distinction
in English, since commanding someone to <i>be</i> something can
mean to change to some state or to maintain some state.<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>