tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 21 07:26:53 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Practicing with questions
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: Practicing with questions
- Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 10:26:56 -0400 (EDT)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message fromMarian Schwartz on Sat, 19 Apr 1997 09:55:40 -0700 (PDT))
>Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 09:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
>
>ghItlh SuStel
>>There's hot debate as to whether you can say {nuq <noun>} for "which <noun>."
>>Personally, I am dead set against it without confirmation by Marc Okrand
>>himself. There's always another, more Klingon way to say it, anyway. More
>>Klingon, because it doesn't require using lots of nouns. Klingon is a
>>language of verbs, use them a lot!
>
>I agree. But I think a good way would be {<noun>mey nuq}; "What of the
><noun>s?" Hypothetical, of course, and feel free to contradict me, but I feel
>it makes much more sense than {nuq <noun>}.
I agree, and it was exactly this reasoning which led us to think of "<noun>
Hoch" for "all of the <noun>s". Unfortunately, that turned out to be
wrong. I believe you'll find "<noun> nuq" used as you suggest in Hamlet,
since we used the same logic you do.
~mark