tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 04 07:48:57 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: New Canon
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: New Canon
- Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 10:48:53 EST
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Mark E. Shoulson" at Jan 3, 95 6:29 pm
According to Mark E. Shoulson:
>
> >Date: Mon, 2 Jan 1995 09:30:58 -0500
> >Originator: [email protected]
> >From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
>
> >qajatlhqu'!
>
> >qoSwI'mo' loSmaHDIch jIHvaD Doch 'IHqu' je' bangwI'. It is
>
> you mean "qoSwIj", right?? I'd say "qoSwIj loSmaHDIchmo'"; treating the
> -DIch number like an adjective. Make sense?
>
> ~mark
All true. I just pulled a typical boo boo on the {-wI'}, and
debated about loSmaHDIch. Technically, it is chuvmey, so the
rules about adjectivals is not clearly in force, but
functionally, it is adjectival, so I go both ways here,
sporadically either leaving the Type 5 on the noun or moving it
to the ordinal number.
If you think this is clearly as it should be, I'll be more
consistent about moving the Type 5.
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |