tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 19 08:29:08 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: rop puqloDwI'
According to R.B Franklin:
>
>
> On Tue, 18 Apr 1995, Alan Anderson wrote:
...
> > puqpu' latlh ropchoHbe'meH juH mejbe' 'ej DuSaQ Suchbe'.
>
> {puqpu' latlh} would mean "the childrens' other one". If you want to say
> "the other children", it would be {latlh puqpu'}.
Think about this again. {puqpu' latlh} means "the children's
another one" or "another one of the children". This is probably
what he wanted. {latlh puqpu'} means "children of another one"
or "another one's children", which means children of a
different parent. That may also be what he meant, but that is
not obvious.
What *I* would have said would be {puqpu' latlhpu'}. "Other
ones of the children."
This is all weird enough that it belongs on at least the second
tier of questions for Okrand to clarify. The problem is that
{latlh} is a noun and we all want to use it as an adjective.
> yoDtargh
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |