tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Oct 06 08:27:14 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: choHghoS
- From: "Garrett M. Hayes" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: choHghoS
- Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 11:29:26 -0400
>----------
>From: [email protected][SMTP:[email protected]]
>Sent: Sunday, October 06, 1996 09:20
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: Re: choHghoS
>
>ghItlh SuStel:
>
>>They actually did an impressive job, in
>>realizing that a verb prefix was needed. Unfortunately, {ghoS} isn't the
>>word they wanted, and they got the prefix wrong.
>
>They got it doubly wrong. {cho-} isn't imperative, and it applies to a
>*single* recipient. {tu-} would have been marginally better, and perhaps
>I could rationalize it as a prompt to follow a step in a prearranged plan.
I would suspect that the phrase used would have been understandable -
and would have IMMEDIATELY marked Sisko as an offworlder by both
pronunciation and syntax. I give Paramount a B for effort and a C- for
execution.
'etlhqengwI'
(vuDmeywIjvaD jIngoy' jiH'e')