On Mon, Apr 1, 2019 at 9:43 PM qurgh lungqIj <qurgh@wizage.net <mailto:qurgh@wizage.net>> wrote:
This is always the case. My statement wasn't that {-Hom} always creates some new, seperate, concept, it's that {-Hom} never means just "small" by itself. There has to be more to it.
Am 02.04.2019 um 17:37 schrieb nIqolay Q:
There /can/ be more to it, and often is, but I don't see anything that suggests there /has/ to be more to it.
I'm sorry to contradict qurgh, but if we decide to stick to the literal explanation of TKD, it clearly says that these suffixes can refer to size without "more to it": TKD, chapter 3.3.1: This suffix [-'a'] indicates that what the noun refers to is bigger, more important, or more powerful than it would be without the suffix. [-Hom] [...] indicates that what the noun refers to is smaller, less important, or less powerful than it would be without the suffix. Listing items in an OR-sentence with commas, means "smaller OR less important OR less powerful". So the possibility of "smaller" works without anything more. That is even confirmed on page 152 of KGT: [...] the noun suffix {-Hom,} a diminutive that adds a meaning of smallness or lack of importance (compare {taj} ["knife"] and {tajHom} ["little knife," the extra small blade in the handle of a <d’k tahg> knife]). Again, it says "smallness" OR "importance", not both. So basically, in addition to the idea of a different meaning (as be'Hom etc), these suffixes can certainly also be used to mean something that's just smaller/bigger than the standard noun. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany" http://www.klingonisch.de http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Type1NounSuffixes