tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 21 10:05:37 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: yIjey'lu'
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: yIjey'lu'
- Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 13:05:03 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 97-09-20 23:40:11 EDT, ghunchu'wI' wrote:
> >but it would be impossible
> >to use something like {yIQuchlu'} "Be happy" that would be said to people
> in
> >general, instead of a defined group. Just a thought.
>
> Yeah, the {-lu'} suffix on an intransitive verb, imperative or not,
doesn't
> work for me.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
The fact that the imperative in Klingon requires a subject (there isn't an
"indefinite you" in Klingon) prevents { -lu'} from making an indefinite
subject command. However, regarding intransitive verbs *without* the
imperative, we do have at least one canon example of using {-lu'} on them, if
I'm not mistaken:
quSDaq ba'lu''a'? {from the Appendix) Is this seat taken?, lit. "Is it sat
at the chair?"
But this is a concept that doesn't work in English well, so this sentence
does seem a little odd.
-Tad Stauffer