On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:24 PM Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se> wrote:

> The use of the suffix {-Ha'} does not imly that the situation or the
> action was different before. It's just the opposite meaning.

While there are some canonical examples that may suggest this to be the case (words like {jaQHa'} come to mind), the original description in TKD suggests that it requires either an undoing of a previous state/action, or that something is done wrongly:

Based on {jaQHa'}, {yItlhHa'}, and so on, I've suspected for a while that {-Ha'} has expanded to include the idea of "the exact opposite quality", at least in some cases. There's never been any confirmation one way or another, though, so I've been reluctant to use it that way. For now, I have it mentally filed away as an idiomatic usage of verb suffixes, like {HIvneS}. Or maybe it's an expansion of the "wrongly" meaning -- being lenient is definitely the wrong way to be strict.

Maybe someone could ask MO about it at the next qep'a'.