tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 18 05:25:21 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "HolQeD" 3:4
- From: "Mark J. Reed" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: "HolQeD" 3:4
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 08:27:08 EST
- In-Reply-To: Your message of Thu, 12 Jan 1995 13:50:12 -0500. <[email protected]>
[email protected] writes:
\ > "I speak Klingon better than you."
\ > {tlhIngan Hol jatlhmeH, jIH po' law', SoH po' puS}
\ > We do have canon for unprefixed {-meH} clause verbs, tho I wouldn't trust
\ > them in all cases.
\
\ I still prefer something like:
\ tlhIngan Hol vIjatlhchu' 'ach Dajatlhlaw' neH.
And it also avoids the issue of using pronouns with law'/puS. Are there
any canonical examples of such? If the construction is really using the
noun-noun possessive, then shouldn't it be {po'wIj} instead of {jIH po'}?
\ Basically, I don't understand the English. Ahhh. Misquote. "If
\ executing an evasive maneuver is SUFFICIENT..." Okay. I still
\ don't understand the English. What is the difference between
\ executing an evasive maneuver and taking evasive action?
In one case, you're executing a single maneuver; in the other case, you're
continuously evading. It's exactly the difference between {yIjun} and
{yIjuntaH}, and one of the examples in 4.2.7. This is undoubtedly why Krankor
chose this particular example.
-marqoS
--
Mark J. Reed
Email: [email protected] - Voice: +1 404 315 6296 x158 - Fax: +1 404 315 0293
SecureWare, Inc. / 2957 Clairmont Rd Suite 200 / Atlanta GA 30329-1647