tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 12 08:05:26 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'

Steven Boozer ([email protected])

• From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
• Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:35:14 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

Se'noj:
> >> Personally, I am rather fond of {tu'lu'be'}. It gives the feeling that
> >> the item or situation it refers to may exist, while no-one has seen it
> >> so it is a hypothetical being discussed.

Our single example of {tu'lu'be'}:

   SuvwI'pu' qan tu'lu'be'
   There are no old warriors. TKW

You may be right, though I think you're reading too much into it.

lay'tel SIvten:
> > As opposed to >tu'be'lu'<?

Bryan S. Jones:
>{tu'be'lu'} gives me more of a feeling that the un-named entity does
>not find anything, rather than a lack of such entities.

Really?  Again, our single example of {tu'be'lu'}:

   QuvlIjDaq yIHmey tu'be'lu'jaj
   May your coordinates be free of tribbles! PK

Sounds to me like a wish for a complete absence of tribbles rather than 
just not finding any where you happened to look.  This is the opposite idea 
to another toast with {tu'}:

   reH HIvje'lIjDaq 'Iwghargh Datu'jaj
   May you always find a bloodworm in your glass! PK



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
    • From: Tad Stauffer <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
    • From: Bryan Jones <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Klingon WOTD: pIch (v)
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: pIch (v)
• Previous by thread: Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
• Next by thread: Re: -be'lu' vs. -lu'be'
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level