tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 31 13:30:25 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch
• Date: Sun, 31 May 1998 15:30:18 -0500
• In-Reply-To: <7107ECAEC9ECD0119BBC00805F684B9C0CE82C@VIPER>

ja' pagh:
>[...]
>Doy'qu' *Sarah*, 'ach wovtaHvIS chal Qongbe'taH neH ghaH. cha'maH
>wejvatlh rep QongDaqDaq QotchoH 'ej SIbI' QongchoH.
>
>rIn jajmaj wa'DIch.

taghpa' rInlaw' je ramraj wa'DIch. :-)

>(1) I've always been curious about this usage - *Sarah* lupDuj =
>"Sarah's plane". I'm not sure the Klingon can go there. She certainly
>doesn't own the thing - it is just associated with her for the moment to
>differentiate it from all the other planes at the airport. I don't know
>if this usage is idiomatic to English or fairly universal. This will
>probably start a long debate...

The debate has already occurred at least once.  Canon usage suggests that
the noun-noun "possessive" construction is not strictly limited to owners.
{peq chem} and {woj choHwI'} are the usual examples cited to support the
expanded "attributive noun" interpretation.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>

• References:
  • cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch
    • From: "Andeen, Eric" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Question
• Next by Date: jIlIH'egh
• Prev by thread: cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch
• Next by thread: Re: cheghta' be'nalwI' - jajmaj wa'DIch
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level