tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 01 14:35:15 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: MO & the "Star Trek: The Experience" communique
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: MO & the "Star Trek: The Experience" communique
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 1998 17:35:05 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- In-Reply-To: <l03020908b2892a4f8733@[205.139.170.223]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998 22:10:24 -0800 (PST) Alan Anderson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> ja' Voragh:
> >Note, however, the interesting double locative: {loghDaq lupDujHom qoDDaq}
> >which I don't think we've ever seen before.Ý Interestingly, {qoD} "inside,
> >interior" only appears in KGT, which also came out in November 1997, the very
> >same month as the communique.Ý In fact, the author uses it twice:
> >
> >Ý quwargh tach Qe' je qoDDaq Hov leng Soj DatIv
> >Ý Enjoy Star Trek themed food and drink at Quark's Bar and Restaurant.
> >
> >This certainly looks like a smoking gun (nISwI' HIch?) to me.Ý But, we've been
> >fooled before.
>
> HIch tlhIch Dalegh'a' SoH?
>
> I think this use of {qoD} is very odd, and it makes me suspect that the
> text here is *not* Okrand's work. My immediate thought was that someone
> read KGT and said to himself, "Aha! At last we have a way to say 'in'
> as opposed to 'on' or 'at'!" and used it in two places where I think the
> suffix {-Daq} would be at least as appropriate.
>
> I must admit, however, that I can't quite figure out where to put {-Daq}
> on {quwargh tach Qe' je}. I'd have to rephrase it and turn the name of
> the place into something other than a locative.
I'm pretty sure we have examples that use {-Daq} twice in such
an instance:
quwargh tachDaq Qe'Daq je...
charghwI' 'utlh