tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 15 17:43:31 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: RE: List of Klingon fauna
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: RE: List of Klingon fauna
- Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 20:14:17 -0400
From: William H. Martin <[email protected]>
>On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:20:56 -0700 (PDT) "Andeen, Eric"
><[email protected]> wrote:>> Both definitions of <pa'> are nouns. <pa'> -
"there, over there,
>> thereabouts (n)" (TKD).
>
>Ouch. My own word list agrees. I got the {adv} reference from
>Holtej's pojwI'. Everyone else using pojwI' should take note of
>this and edit your lexicon to correct it.
>
>Of course, I still think it SHOULD be an adverbial...
>
>But I accept it as a noun, even though it does imply an
>locative concept which is basically adverbial in nature. It does
>for locatives what {DaH} does for time stamps.
It's a noun which acts in an adverbial manner. It's still a noun
through-and-through.
>If it really were a noun, you could put {-Daq} on it, right?
Not if there were a rule saying that it can't take that suffix. And there
is such a rule.
>And
>it really could be the direct object of a verb. It could be a
>subject of a verb, too.
Sure thing. It *could*. Because of its nature, it's unlikely that it would
be used that way often, but we know of no rule which forbids it. Perhaps
such a rule exists, as yet undiscovered. Or perhaps there is no such rule,
and it's just an uncommon way to use it.
SuStel
Stardate 98455.9